IN  MEM© 
Bnil  G. 

REAM 
Beck 

PRIZE  ORATIONS 

OF  THE 

INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION, 


EDITED  WITH  AN  INTRODUCTION 

BY 
STEPHEN  F.  WESTON,  PH.D. 

EXECUTIVE   SECRETARY  OF  THE  ASSOCIATION 

PROFESSOR  OF  ECONOMICS  AND  SOCIOLOGY,  ANTIOCH  COLLEGE 
YELLOW   SPRINGS,  OHIO 

FOREWORD  BY 
CHARLES  F.  THWING 


BOSTON 

THE  WORLD  PEACE  FOUNDATION 
1914 


•••: 

Y/f 


IN  MEMORJAM 
£  -nnvil     G,. 


THIS  VOLUME  IS  DEDICATED 

TO  THE 
MISSES  MARY  AND  HELEN  SEABURY 

WHOSE  INTEREST  AND  ASSISTANCE 

HAVE  MADE  POSSIBLE  THE  ORATIONS  OF  THE 

INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

FOREWORD vii 

By  CHARLES  F.  THWING,  President  of  the  Associa- 
tion 

THE  INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION   .         1 
By   STEPHEN    F.  WESTON,   Executive  Secretary  of 
the  Association 

THE  CONFLICT  OF  WAR  AND  PEACE       ....       25 
By  PAUL  SMITH,  DePauw  University,  Indiana 

THE  UNITED  STATES  AND  UNIVERSAL  PEACE        35 
By  GLENN  PORTER  WISHARD,  Northwestern  Univer- 
sity, Illinois 

THE  EVOLUTION  OF  WORLD  PEACE    .....       45 
By  LEVI  T.  PENNINGTON,  Earlham  College,  Indiana 

THE  WASTE  OF  WAR— THE  WEALTH  OF  PEACE       55 
By   ARTHUR    FORAKER    YOUNG,   Western   Reserve 
University,  Ohio 

THE   HOPE   OF  PEACE 65 

By  STANLEY  H.  HOWE,  Albion  College,  Michigan 

THE   ROOSEVELT   THEORY  OF   WAR 73 

By  PERCIVAL  V.BLANSHARD,  University  of  Michigan 

NATIONAL   HONOR  AND  VITAL  INTERESTS   .     .       81 
By  RUSSELL  WEISMAN,  Western  Reserve  University 
Ohio 


vi  IMMZK  ORATIONS 

PAGE 

THE   EVOLUTION   OF   PATRIOTISM 91 

By  PAUL  B.  BLANSHARD,  University  of  Michigan 

CERTAIN  PHASES  OF  THE   PEACE  MOVEMENT      101 

By  CALVKKT  M.UJUUDER,  St.  John's  College,  Mary- 
land 

THE  ASSURANCE   OF  PEACE Ill 

By  VERNON  M.  WELSH,  Knox  College,  Illinois 

EDUCATION   FOR  PEACE 121 

By  FRANCIS  J.  LYONS,  University  of  Texas 

NATIONAL   HONOR  AND  PEACE 129 

By  Louis  BROIDO,  University  of  Pittsburgh,  Penn- 
sylvania 

THE     NEW     NATIONALISM     AND     THE     PEACE 

MOVEMENT 137 

By  RALPH  D.  LUCAS,  Knox  College,  Illinois 

MAN'S    MORAL    NATURE    THE    HOPE    OF    UNI- 
VERSAL  PEACE 147 

By  VICTOR  MORRIS,  University  of  Oregon 

THE  TASK  OF   THE   TWENTIETH   CENTURY  .     .     157 
By  HAROLD  HUSTED,  Ottawa  University,  Kansas 

THE    PRESENT     STATUS     OF     INTERNATIONAL 

ARBITRATION 167 

By  BRYANT  SMITH,  Guilford  College,  North  Carolina 


FOREWORD 

These  orations  are  selected  from  hundreds  of  similar 
addresses  spoken  in  recent  years  by  hundreds  of  stu- 
dents in  American  colleges.  I  believe  it  is  not  too  bold 
to  say  that  they  represent  the  highest  level  of  under- 
graduate thinking  and  speaking.  They  are  worthy  in- 
terpreters of  the  cause  of  peace,  but  they  are,  as  well, 
noble  illustrations  of  the  type  of  intellectual  and  moral 
culture  of  American  students.  Whoever  reads  them  will, 
I  believe,  become  more  optimistic,  not  only  over  the 
early  fulfillment  of  the  dreams  of  peace  among  nations, 
but  also  over  the  intellectual  and  ethical  condition  of 
academic  life. 

For  the  simple  truth  is  that  the  cause  of  peace  makes 
an  appeal  of  peculiar  force  to  the  undergraduate.  It 
appeals  to  his  imagination.  This  imagination  is  at  once 
historic  and  prophetic.  War  makes  an  appeal  to  the 
historic  imagination  of  the  student.  His  study  of  Greek 
and  Roman  history  has  been  devoted  too  largely  to 
the  wars  that  these  peoples  waged.  Marathon,  Salamis, 
Carthage,  are  names  altogether  too  familiar  and  signifi- 
cant. By  contrast  he  sees  what  this  history,  which  is 
written  in  blood,  might  have  become.  If  the  millions  of 
men  slain  had  been  permitted  to  live,  and  if  the  un- 
counted treasure  spent  had  been  economically  used,  the 
results  in  the  history  of  civilization  would  have  been  far 
richer  and  nobler.  He  notes,  too,  does  this  student,  that 

vii 


viii  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

if  the  last  decades  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  the 
first  decades  of  the  nineteenth  had  been  free  from  wars 
in  Europe,  humanity  would  now  have  attained  a  far 
higher  level  of  physical  and  intellectual  strength.  The 
historic  imagination  of  the  student  pictures,  as  his  reason 
interprets,  such  conditions.  His  prophetic  imagination 
likewise  exercises  its  creative  function.  The  student  sees 
nations  to-day  dwelling  in  armed  truces  and  moving  to 
and  fro  as  a  soldiery  actual  or  possible.  He  realizes 
that  war  puts  up  what  civilization  puts  down,  and  puts 
down  what  civilization  elevates.  He  reads  the  lamented 
Robertson's  great  lecture  on  the  poetry  of  war,  but  he 
knows  also,  as  Robertson  intimates,  that  "  peace  is 
blessed ;  peace  arises  out  of  charity."  The  poetry  of 
peace  is  more  entrancing  than  the  poetry  of  carnage. 
To  this  primary  element  in  the  mind  of  the  under- 
graduate —  the  imagination  —  our  great  cause  therefore 
makes  an  appeal  of  peculiar  earnestness. 

To  the  reason  of  the  college  man,  also,  the  cause  of 
peace  makes  a  peculiar  appeal  through  its  simple  logic. 
War  is  most  illogical.  It  breaks  the  law  of  the  proper 
interpretation  of  causality.  When  two  nations  of  adja- 
cent territory  cannot  agree  over  a  boundary  line,  why 
should  settlement  be  made  in  terms  of  physical  force  ? 
When  two  nations  fail  to  see  eye  to  eye  in  adjusting 
the  questions  of  certain  fishing  rights,  why  should  they 
incarnadine  the  seas  in  seeking  for  the  truth  to  be  applied 
in  settlement  ?  In  civil  disputes,  why,  asks  the  student, 
should  rifles  be  employed  to  discover  truth  and  right  ? 
War  is  an  intellectual  anachronism,  a  breach  of  logic. 
Of  course,  one  may  reply,  humanity  is  not  logical  in  its 
reasoning  any  more  than  it  is  exact  in  its  observing. 


FOREWORD  ix 

Of  course  it  is  not ;  but  the  college  is  set  to  cast  out  the 
rule  of  no-reason  and  to  bring  in  the  reign  of  reason. 
Peace  furnishes  a  motive  and  a  method  of  such  ad- 
vancement. Peace  is  logic  for  the  individual  and  for 
the  nation. 

The  illogical  character  of  war  is  also  made  evident  by 
.the  contrast  between  the  college  man  as  a  thinker  and 
war  itself.  The  college  man  who  thinks  sees  truth 
broadly ;  war  interprets  life  narrowly,  at  the  point  of 
the  bayonet.  The  college  man  who  thinks  sees  truth 
deeply ;  war  makes  its  primary  appeal  to  the  superficial 
love  of  glory,  of  pomp,  and  of  circumstance.  The  col- 
lege man  who  thinks  sees  truth  in  its  highest  relations ; 
war  is  hell.  The  college  man  who  thinks  sees  truth  in 
long  ranges  and  in  far-off  horizons ;  war  is  emotional^ 
and  the  warrior  flings  the  years  into  the  hours.  The  col- 
lege man  who  thinks,  thinks  accurately,  with  logic,  with 
reason  ;  war  does  not  think  —  it  strikes.  "  Strike,"  the 
college  man  may  also  say,  "  but  hear  I  "  he  cries ;  "  yes, 
think."  If  the  college  can  make  the  student  think,  it 
has  created  the  greatest  force  for  making  the  world  and 
the  age  a  world  and  an  age  of  peace. 

It  is  plain  enough,  too,  that  the  economic  side  of  war 
makes  a  tremendous  appeal  to  the  student.  The  cost  of 
.the  battleship  Indiana  was  practically  $6,000,000 ;  the 
total  value  of  grounds  and  buildings  of  the  colleges  and 
universities  in  Indiana  is  slightly  more  than  $7,000,000, 
and  the  productive  funds  are  $4,000,000.  The  total  cost 
of  the  battleship  Oregon  was  more  than  $6,500,000 ;  the 
total  value  of  grounds  and  buildings  of  the  universi- 
ties and  colleges  of  Oregon  is  less  than  $2,000,000, 
and  the  productive  funds  amount  to  hardly  more  than 


x  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

$2,000,000.  The  cost  of  the  battleship  Iowa  was  nearly 
$6,000,000,  and  the  productive  funds  of  all  the  col- 
leges and  universities  of  the  state  are  only  $5,000,000. 
The  battleship .  Kentucky  cost  $5,000,000;  in  the  col- 
leges of  that  state  the  total  amount  of  productive  funds 
is  only  $2,000,000,  and  the  total  value  of  grounds  and 
buildings,  $3,000,000.  The  battleship  Alabama  cost  more 
than  $4,500,000,  and  the  entire  property,  real  and  per- 
sonal, of  all  the  universities  and  colleges  in  that  state 
is  less  than  $4,000,000.  The  cost  of  the  battleship 
Wisconsin  was  more  than  $4,500,000 ;  the  whole  value 
of  all  grounds  and  buildings  of  the  colleges  and  univer- 
sities of  the  state  is  only  slightly  more  than  $7,000,000. 
The  battleship  Maine  cost  more  than  $5,000,000,  and 
the  entire  value  in  grounds,  buildings,  and  productive 
funds  of  the  colleges  and  universities  of  that  state  is 
little  more  than  $5,000,000. 

The  value  of  the  buildings  of  five  hundred  colleges 
and  universities  in  this  country  was  estimated  in  a  recent 
year  at  $262,000,000,  and  the  productive  funds  at  $357,- 
000,000.  Leaving  out  those  now  in  course  of  construc- 
tion, the  total  cost  of  the  battleships  and  armored  cruisers 
\/  \  of  the  United  States  named  after  individual  states  is 
$325,000,000. 

The  cost  of  maintaining  these  battleships  during  the 
fiscal  year  of  1910,  though  many  were  in  commission 
but  a  small  part  of  the  year,  amounted  to  no  less  than 
$33,000,000.  The  amount  which  all  the  colleges  and 
universities  in  this  country  received  in  tuition  fees  in 
1911  was  only  $20,000,000 ;  and  the  entire  income  re- 
ceived both  from  fees  and  productive  funds  was  only 
about  $34,000,000.  In  other  words,  when  one  takes  into 


FOREWORD  xi 

account  the   depreciation  of  the  battleship  or  armored-^ 
cruiser,  the  entire  cost  of  the  thirty-eight  battleships  for    /  .  i(* 
a  single  year  is  greater  than  the  administration  of  the    , 
entire  American  system  of  higher  education. 

Is  it  not  painfully  manifest  that  the  cost  of  war  con- 
stitutes a  mighty  argument  for  the  economic  mind  of 
the  student? 

Moreover,  I  am  inclined  to  believe  that  the  very  diffi- 
culties belonging  to  the  triumph  of  our  great  cause  con- 
stitute ground  for  its  closer  relationship  to  the  college 
man.  The  college  man  wishes,  as  well  as  needs,  a  hard 
job.  The  easy  task,  the  rosy  opportunity,  makes  no 
appeal.  He  is  like  Garibaldi's  soldiers,  who,  when  the 
choice  was  once  offered  them  by  the  commander  to  sur- 
render to  ease  and  safety,  chose  hardship  and  peril. 
The  Boxer  revolution  in  China  was  followed  by  hun- 
dreds of  applications  from  college  men  and  women  to  be 
sent  forth  to  China  to  take  the  place  of  the  martyrs. 
The  difficulties  in  the  progress  of  the  great  cause  are 
of  every  sort  and  condition.  Industrial  narrowness  and 
commercial  greed,  military  and  political  ambitions,  sec- 
tional zeal,  national  jealousy,  the  sensitiveness  of  each 
nation  in  matters  of  national  honor,  the  glamour  of  the 
good  and  the  beautiful  under  the  sentiment  of  patriot- 
ism, the  historic  honor  attending  death  for  one's  coun- 
try, the  ease  of  creating  war  scares  among  the  people, 
the  looseness  of  the  organization  of  the  higher  forces  of 
the  world  —  all  these  conditions  and  more  pile  up  into  a 
Pelion  on  Ossa  as  a  part  of  the  difficulties  standing  in 
the  progress  of  our  great  movement.  But  such  diffi- 
culties inspire  rather  than  deter.  The  student  says,  "  I 
will ;  therefore  I  can."  He  also  says,  "  I  can ;  therefore 


xii  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

I  will."  Pie  knows  that  the  forces  fighting  for  him  are 
more  than  those  that  fight  against  him,  strong  as  these 
are.  Man  in  his  noblest  relationships,  the  songs  of  the 
poet  (the  best  interpreter,  from  Homer  and  Virgil  to 
the  "  Winepress "  of  Alfred  Noyes),  the  torture,  the 
pains,  the  sufferings,  the  woes,  the  vision  of  the  prophet 
of  a  loving  and  perfect  humanity,  the  reason  of  logic  — 
all  these  and  more  are  to  him  inspirations,  and  strengthen 
him  in  his  great  quest.  He  is  a  knight  of  the  Holy  Grail 
that  is  filled  from  the  river  of  the  water  of  life. 

Perhaps,  furthermore,  the  cause  makes  its  most  im- 
pressive appeal  to  the  collegian  in  its  internationalism, 
oranterpatriotism.  This  internationalism  addresses  itself 
to  his  owrf  international  appreciation.  The  collegian  is 
a  patriot.  He  is  a  patriot  not  only  against  a  foreign 
country  but  often  against  certain  parts  of  his  own  coun- 
try —  loyal  to  the  interests  which  he  believes  a  section 
of  his  own  nation  properly  represents.  The  German 
students  have  fought  for  their  Fatherland ;  they  have 
also  fought  for  the  liberal  sentiments  of  their  own  land 
against  reactionary  movements,  as  in  1848.  In  the 
American  Civil  War  no  brighter  record  is  to  be  found 
than  is  embodied  in  the  tablets  in  Memorial  Hall, 
Cambridge,  or  in  Memorial  Hall,  Chapel  Hill,  Uni- 
versity of  North  Carolina.  But  the  collegian  possesses 
the  international  sense,  and  possesses  it  more  and  more 
deeply  with  each  passing  decade.  His  is  the  international 
mind,  interpreting  phenomena  in  terms  of  common  justice. 
His  is  the  international  heart,  feeling  the  universal  joys 
and  sorrows,  woes  and  exultations.  His  is  the  interna- 
tional will,  seeking  to  do  good  to  all  men.  His  is  the 
international  conscience,  weighing  right  and  duty  in  the 


FOREWORD  xiii 

scales  of  divine  humanity.  Whatever  interpretation  he 
gives  to  the  sayings  of  Paul  that  God  made  all  nations 
of  men  to  dwell  on  the  face  of  the  earth  and  has  fixed 
the  bounds  of  their  habitation,  —  whether  he  stops  with 
the  words  "  the  face  of  the  earth "  or  whether  he  goes 
on  to  interpret  the  limitations  of  their  residence,  —  it  is 
nevertheless  true  that  his  mind,  his  heart,  his  will,  and 
his  conscience  do  go  out  toward  all  nations  in  their 
endeavor  to  realize  their  highest  racial  and  interracial 
peace.  No  man  is  a  foreigner  to  him. 

I  have,  I  trust,  said  enough  to  intimate  that  these 
orations  arise  out  of  a  natural  and  normal  condition  of 
the  student  mind  and  heart.  They  also,  in  subject  as 
well  as  in  origin,  bear  a  special  message  of  cheer  and 
hopefulness  to  all  who  have  a  good  will  toward  the 
collegian  and  toward  the  great  cause  for  which  we  all 

are  laboring. 

CHARLES  F.  THWING 

President 

WESTERN  RESERVE  UNIVERSITY 
CLEVELAND,  OHIO 


PRIZE  ORATIONS 

THE    INTERCOLLEGIATE    PEACE 
ASSOCIATION 

Origin.  In  the  autumn  of  1904  President  Noah  E. 
Byers  of  Goshen  College,  Goshen,  Indiana,  a  Mennonite 
college,  invited  to  a  conference  representatives  of  all  the 
colleges  in  Indiana,  Pennsylvania,  and  Ohio  that  are 
conducted  by  those  religious  denominations  that  advo- 
cate nonresistance  as  one  of  their  essential  religious 
principles.  Such  bodies  are  the  Mennonites,  the  Dunk- 
ards,  and  the  Quakers.  In  the  spring  of  1905  a  more 
specific  invitation  was  sent  out,  with  the  result  that  a 
conference  was  held  at  Goshen  College,  June  22-23, 
1905.  This  date  is  important,  since  the  call  of  President 
Byers  for  such  a  conference  was  the  first  active  step  ever 
taken  to  interest  the  college  world,  and  particularly  un- 
dergraduates, in  the  great  movement  for  world  peace 
founded  upon  the  idea  of  human  brotherhood.  While 
the  conference  did  not  take  place  until  a  month  after 
President_Gilman  had  suggested  to  the  Lake  Mohonk 
Conference,  in  May,  1905,  that  it  should  extend  its 
peace  work  to  the  colleges  and  universities,  yet  the  call 
for  the  conference  was  several  months  prior  to  the  action 
of  the  Mohonk  Conference. 

Eight  institutions  were  represented  at  this  confer- 
ence —  Goshen,  Earlham,  Central  Mennonite,  Ashland, 

1 


2  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

\Y  ilmington,  Juniata,  and  Penn  colleges  and  Friends'  Uni- 
versity. N0  definite  plan  of  work  had  been  mapped  out, 
but  a  simple  organization  was  effected,  and  arrangements 
s<  ( -iv  inatu'  mi-  :\  second  conference  at  Earlham  College 
(Society  of  Friends).  Professor  Elbert  Russell  of  Earl- 
ham  College  was  elected  president,  and  upon  him  de- 
volved most  of  the  work  of  arranging  for  the  second 
conference,  which  was  held  April  13-14, 1906.  For  this 
conference  no  denominational  lines  were  drawn,  it  being 
felt  that  all  colleges  and  universities  should  be  interested 
in  this  important  work.  Hence  invitations  were  sent  to 

/  all  institutions  of  higher  learning  in  both  Indiana  and 
^  Ohio.  Eight  institutions  were  represented:  Indiana, 
three  —  Earlham  and  Goshen  colleges  and  Indiana  Uni- 
versity ;  Ohio,  five  —  Antioch,  Denison,  Miami,  Wilming- 
ton, and  Central  Mennonite.  This  representation  was 
small,  considering  the  importance  of  the  conference  and  the 
excellent  program  that  had  been  arranged  for  by  Pro- 
fessor Russell.  But  notwithstanding  the  small  number 
of  institutions  represented,  the  conference  was  a  marked 
success,  made  so  very  largely  by  the  many  excellent 
addresses  —  among  others,  those  of  Edwin  D.  Mead,  Ben- 
jamin F.  Trneblood,  Professor  Ernst  Richard  of  Colum- 

|  bia  University,  and  Honorable  William  Dudley  Foulke. 
On  the  last  day  of  the  conference  the  delegates  from 
the  different  colleges  met  and  perfected  a  permanent 
organization,  which  it  was  agreed  should  be  called  the 
Intercollegiate  Peace  Association.  Thus,  after  a  year  of 
preliminary  work,  the  Intercollegiate  Peace  Association 
came  into  definite  and  permanent  existence  on  April  14, 
1906.  At  this  meeting  Dean  William  P.  Rogers  of 
the  Cincinnati  Law  School  was  elected  president,  and 


INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION          3 

Professor  Elbert  Russell,  secretary  and  treasurer.  The 
president  and  the  secretary,  President  Noah  E.  Byers  of 
Goshen  College,  and  Professor  Stephen  F.  Weston  of 
Antioch  College  constituted  the  executive  committee. 
The  writer  has  remained  on  the  executive  committee  from 
the  beginning,  as  either  an  elected  or  an  ex-officio  member. 

Two  methods  of  propaganda  were  adopted :  intercol- 
legiate oratorical  contests,  and  public  addresses  on  peace 
questions  before  the  student  body  and  faculties  of  col- 
leges and  universities.  It  was  also  agreed  that  the  work 
should  begin  with  Ohio  and  Indiana  and  gradually 
extend  to  other  states.  Although  no  definite  plan  was 
formulated  until  a  year  later,  at  the  meeting  at  Cincin- 
nati, it  was  understood  from  the  outset  that  it  should 
be  the  aim  gradually  to  extend  the  field  of  work,  so 
that  ultimately  most  of  the  institutions  of  higher  learn- 
ing in  practically  all  of  the  states  should  be  embraced 
within  the  organization  and  participate  in  the  contests. 

Purpose.  The  purpose  of  the  association  has  been 
quite  definitely  set  forth  in  my  "  Historical  Sketch  " l  and 
in  my  report  for  1912.  From  these  the  following  state- 
ment is  very  largely  borrowed.  The  fundamental  pur- 
pose of  the  Intercollegiate  Peace  Association  is  to  instill 
into  the  minds  and  hearts  of  the  young  men  of  our  col- 
leges and  universities  the  principle  that  the  highest  ideals 
of  justice  and  righteousness  should  govern  the  conduct 
of  men  in  all  their  international  affairs  quite  as  much  as 
in  purely  individual  and  social  matters,  and  that,  there- 
fore, the  true  aim  of  all  international  dealings  should  be 
to  settle  differences,  of  whatever  nature,  by  peaceful  meth- 
ods through  an  appeal  to  the  noblest  human  instincts  and 

-l  Printed  in  Antioch  College  Bulletin,  Vol.  VII,  No.  1,  December,  1910, 


4  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

the  highest  ideals  of  life,  rather  than  by  the  arbitrament 
of  the  sword  through  an  appeal  to  the  lower  passions ; 
and,  further,  both  on  humanitarian  and  economic  grounds, 
to  arouse  in  the  youth  of  to-day  an  appreciation  of  the 
importance  of  a  peaceful  settlement  of  international  dis- 
putes, and  to  inculcate  a  spirit  antagonistic  to  the  in- 
human waste  of  life  and  the  reckless  waste  of  wealth  in 
needless  warfare. 

This  appeal  to  the  idealism  of  youth  is  founded  upon 
the  psychological  fact  that  it  is  the  ideals  of  life  that 
determine  the  conduct  of  life.  It  is  ideals  that  rule  the 
world ;  hence  the  importance  of  right  ideals  based  upon 
a  comprehensive  understanding  of  the  real  nature  and 
deepest  implications  of  human  fellowship.  The  alleged 
impracticability  is  not  in  the  ideal  but  in  the  difficulty 
of  making  the  ideal  such  a  dominant  part  of  our  being 
that  it  shall  consistently  direct  our  activities  under  every 
circumstance.  One  of  the  essential  conditions  of  human 
progress  is  the  conviction  that  such  ideals  are  vital  to 
the  highest  attainments  and  that  these  should  be  the  aim 
of  all  our  strivings.  Unfortunately  such  a  standard  of  life 
is  far  from  being  realized.  Policy  rules  largely  in  the 
world  of  practical  life ;  either  high  ideals  are  considered 
impracticable,  or  there  is  no  attempt  to  enforce  consist- 
ency between  belief  and  practice. 

Mindful  of  the  further  fact  that  the  ideals  and  habits 
of  thought  and  action  that  prevail  in  mature  life  are 
those  that  are  formed  in  youth,  the  Intercollegiate  Peace 
Association  turns  to  the  young  manhood  of  the  under- 
graduate for  its  field  of  operations.  The  aim  is  to  give 
such  a  firm  mold  to  the  ideals  of  the  undergraduate  that 
they  shall  for  all  time  shape  his  activities  to  the  end  of 


INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION  5 

righteous  conduct  in  all  international  dealings.  In  par- 
ticular, the  aim  is  to  cultivate  in  the  young  men  of  our 
colleges  and  universities  such  sentiments  and  standards 
of  conduct  as  will  insure  their  devotion  to  the  further- 
ance of  international  peace  through  arbitration  and  other 
methods  of  pacific  settlement  rather  than  by  battleships  — 
standards  of  conduct  based  upon  the  fundamental  truth 
that  conflicts  between  men,  and  therefore  principles  of 
right  and  justice,  can  be  rightly  settled  only  through  the 
mediation  of  mind,  and  that  every  effort  to  settle  them 
by  force  is  not  only  illogical,  a  psychological  impossi- 
bility, but  is  the  way  of  the  brute,  not  the  way  of  man, 
whose  nature  touches  the  divine.  All  the  more  impor- 
tant must  this  work  with  the  undergraduate  be  consid- 
ered when  we  reflect  that  it  is  the  young  men  in  our 
colleges  and  universities  to-day  who  will  mold  the  public 
opinion  and  the  national  and  international  policy  of  the 
next  generation ;  for  it  is  such  young  men  as  these  that 
will  control  the  pulpit  and  the  press,  the  legislation  and 
the  diplomacy  of  the  future.  It  is  this  fact  that  gives 
such  peculiar  importance  to  the  work  of  the  Intercol- 
legiate Peace  Association.  To  quote  from  the  report  of 
the  secretary  for  1912: 

"Other  peace  societies  are  laboring  to  create  a  public 
sentiment  to-day  in  favor  of  international  peace,  through 
arbitration  of  all  international  differences.  This  is  very 
essential.  But  the  Intercollegiate  Peace  Association  is 
founded  upon  the  belief  that  the  cause  of  peace  will  not 
triumph  in  a  day,  and  that  it  is  therefore  of  the  utmost^ 
importance  that  right  ideals  be  rooted  into  the  minds 
of  those  who  will  give  expression  to  the  public  opin- 
ion of  the  future.  In  brief,  it  is  building  more  for  the 


6  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

future  than  for  the  immediate  present.  The  millennium 
of  peace  will  not  come  until  the  ideals  of  a  Christian 
civilization  take  deeper  root  in  the  minds  and  hearts  of 
those  who  are  the  leaders  of  thought  and  action.  One  of 
the  crying  sins  of  to-day  is  that  professions  of  righteous 
living  in  accordance  with  Christian  ethical  ideals  are  not 
taken  seriously.  Note  the  disgraceful  policy  that  has 
been  pursued  with  regard  to  Turkey  by  the  nations  of 
Europe^  that  profess  to  be  disciples  of  the  Prince  of 
Peace.  Hence  it  is  of  the  utmost  importance  that  those 
who  are  to  become  the  future  translators  of  ideals  into 
action  shall  be  imbued  with  right  principles  of  life  and 
of  human  relations.  To  this  end  it  is  sought  to  cultivate 
the  right  sentiment  against  war,  and  for  international 
peace,  among  the  undergraduates  of  our  colleges ;  for 
what  the  undergraduate  thinks  about  and  reads  about 
to-day  will  very  largely  determine  his  future  principles 
and  his  conduct,  and  it  is  he  who  is  destined  to  mold 
the  ideals,  shape  the  policies,  and  determine  the  actions 
of  the  people  of  to-morrow." 

Methods  and  Results.  To  carry  out  these  purposes  two 
things  are  essential :  an  awakened  interest  in  the  cause 
of  peace,  and  some  definite  and  effective  method  for 
molding  sentiments  and  habits  of  thought  that  will  per- 
sist with  such  vitality  that  they  will  give  shape  to  future 
conduct  and  activities.  To  arouse  an  interest  in  the  sub- 
ject, on  the  part  of  both  professors  and  students,  it  was 
believed  at  the  outset  that  public  addresses  would  be 
effective,  and  it  was  hoped  that  the  association  would 
be  able  to  inaugurate  a  course  of  such  addresses  in  our 
colleges  and  universities.  It  was,  however,  soon  found 
that  to  finance  such  a  course  would  require  more  money 


INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION  7 

than  we  could  hope  to  command  for  some  time  to  come. 
In  consequence,  very  little  has  been  done  along  this  line 
further  than  to  arrange  for  occasional  addresses  and  to 
encourage  chapel  talks.  It  is  this  field  of  work  that 
the  Lake  Mohonk  Conference  voted  to  adopt  at  the 
suggestion  of  Dr.  Oilman.  The  conference  also  found 
it  difficult  to  carry  out  the  plan,  and  our  association  was* 
invited  to  assume  the  whole  of  this  work  —  a  request  we  i 
would  gladly  have  accepted,  but  which  we  were  compelled f 
to  decline  for  want  of  funds.  It  is  a  very  important  field! 
of  work  and  could  be  made  very  effective  toward  real-? 
izing  the  ultimate  goal  of  the  Intercollegiate  Peace 
Association,  for  its  effect  would  undoubtedly  be  the  en- 
listment of  a  much  larger  number  of  the  students  in  the 
oratorical  contests,  which  must  be  our  chief  reliance  for 
getting  international  peace  ideas  to  take  a  vital  root  in 
the  undergraduate  mind.  If  we  cannot  secure  the  neces- 
sary funds  for  carrying  on  this  important  work,  it  is  hoped 
that  some  other  peace  society  will  do  it  for  us,  for  sucll 
addresses  could  be  made  a  most  effective  complement  to 
our  work. 

Being  compelled  to  abandon  the  public  addresses  for 
want  of  money,  we  have  concentrated  most  of  our  efforts 
upon  the  intercollegiate  oratorical  contests  as  perhaps 
the  most  effective  method  for  carrying  out  the  purpose 
of  the  association.  The  contests  are  bound  to  arouse  an 
interest  in  the  subject,  while  the  preparation  of  orations 
is  sure  to  ingrain  thoughts,  sentiments,  and  convictions 
that  will  be  indelible  in  the  character  of  the  young  men 
who  participate  in  the  contests.  While  the  contests  are 
oratorical  in  their  nature,  their  primary  purpose  is  not 
the  cultivation  of  oratory.  Oratory  is  simply  used  as  a 


8  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

means  to  an  end  —  the  cultivation  of  right  ideas  of  jus- 
tice and  righteousness  between  nations.  That  such  a  re- 
sult will  accrue  is  assured  both  in  psychological  principles 
and  in  experience.  Every  student  who  produces  a  well- 
prepared  oration  is  bound  to  make  the  thoughts  and 
sentiments  expressed  a  part  of  his  being.  The  oration 
would  not  be  effective  if  it  were  otherwise.  The  writer 
has  heard  scores  of  these  orations,  and  he  is  convinced 
of  the  sincerity  and  earnestness  of  the  orators.  Moreover, 
letters  written  to  him  by  those  who  have  won  prizes,  at- 
testing their  interest  in  and  their  devotion  to  the  cause, 
by  reason  of  their  participation  in  the  contests,  give  ample 
evidence  that  the  contests  are  bearing  fruit.  Nor  can  one 
read  the  orations  in  this  volume  without  being  convinced 
of  their  sincerity. 

Indeed,  the  reason  why  we  do  not  have  intercollegiate 
debates  instead  of  contests  in  oratory  is  because  of  the 
psychological  truth,  amply  justified  by  experience,  that 
the  student  who  prepares  for  the  negative  side  of  a 
peace  question  would  tend  to  have  his  thoughts  perma- 
nently fixed  along  the  lines  of  the  advocates  of  great 
armaments.  It  is  not  that  the  student  should  not  know 
the  arguments  opposing  the  ideas  of  the  advocates  of  peace 
by  arbitration.  We  would  not  cultivate  bigotry  even  in  a 
good  cause.  We  would  have  him  know  the  facts,  as  in- 
deed he  must  before  he  can  present  any  arguments  for 
peace  that  would  have  any  significance.  But  an  acquaint- 
ance with  the  opposing  arguments  is  quite  a  different 
thing,  in  its  effect  upon  the  thought  of  the  student,  from 
making  that  thought  his  own  and  publicly  defending  it. 

Other  results  may  be  mentioned.  While  the  cultiva- 
tion of  oratory  is  not  a  function  of  the  Intercollegiate 


INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION  9 

Peace  Association,  it  does  foster  oratory  as  a  valuable  if 
not  an  indispensable  instrument  for  effecting  its  own 
end.  In  fact,  the  oratorical  contests  are  something  more 
than  agencies  for  interesting  undergraduates  in  the  peace 
movement.  The  cultivation  of  the  art  of  expression  and 
of  public  speaking,  now  very  generally  provided  for  in 
college  and  university  curriculums,  is  of  especial  signifi- 
cance to  the  work  of  this  association.  For  it  is  not  alone 
of  importance  that  the  graduate  who  leaves  his  alma 
mater  should  be  indoctrinated  with  a  message  of  peace 
for  the  world ;  that  his  message  may  be  effective,  he 
must  also  have  attained  some  proficiency  in  the  art  of 
clear  and  forceful  diction  and  in  the  art  of  delivering  his 
message  in  a  pleasing  and  convincing  manner.  Therefore, 
it  is  not  without  reason  that  our  contests  are  for  the  most 
part  under  the  immediate  direction  of  the  department  of 
English,  or  of  whatever  departments  have  charge  of  the 
public  speaking  in  the  various  colleges  and  universities. 
A  further  factor  in  these  contests  is  their  cultural 
value,  both  moral  and  intellectual.  They  necessarily 
cultivate  the  highest  ethical  conceptions,  historical  and 
political  knowledge,  and  careful  and  logical  thinking. 
To  quote  from  the  secretary's  report  for  1912:  <:?  The ' 
work  of  the  Intercollegiate  Peace  Association  is  a  great 
force  for  righteousness  between  nation  and  nation,  and 
so  between  man  and  man,  and  therefore  may  be  consid- 
ered as  supplementary  to  the  more  strictly  moral  and 
intellectual  culture  in  our  institutions  of  higher  learning. 
The  ethical  value  is  not  the  only  value  of  the  contests. 
In  the  preparation  of  orations  the  undergraduate  neces- 
sarily informs  himself  of  historical  conditions,  of  the 
economic  and  social .  effects  of  war,  of  the  legal  and 


10  P1UZE  ORATIONS 

constitutional  principles  involved,  and  of  the  problems, 
difficulties,  and  principles  concerned  with  international 
relations.  It  is  this  early  beginning  of  an  intelligent 
understanding  of  the  problems  involved,  together  with 
the  right  moral  insight,  that  must  count  for  future  effec- 
tiveness in  shaping  international  policies  and  practices." 
Finally,  while  these  contests  have  chiefly  in  mind  the 
shaping  of  the  public  opinion  of  coming  generations,  they 
are  by  no  means  a  negligible  factor  in  their  influence 
upon  the  public  opinion  of  to-day.  The  contests  —  local, 
state,  and  interstate  —  are  heard  by  many  hundreds  of 
people  every  year,  and  in  many  cases  by  persons  who 
would  otherwise  seldom  come  in  contact  with  peace 
sentiments.  The  permeating  influence  in  college  circles 
extends  beyond  those  who  participate  in  the  contests. 
The  influence  of  any  single  contest  may  indeed  be  small, 
but  so  too  is  the  influence  of  any  one  peace  conference 
or  congress.  The  task  of  molding  public  opinion  along 
the  lines  of  any  human  uplift  is  always  slow,  and  only 
gradually  do  the  influences  of  this  character  permeate 
and  take  possession  of  the  social  mind ;  but  every  influence 
leaves  its  impression.  It  is  only  by  persistent  activities 
and  cumulative  effects  that  the  social  mind  can  be  aroused 
to  a  full  consciousness  of  any  great  moral  issue,  and 
still  more  true  is  this  when  that  moral  issue  is  of  national 
or  international  importance.  The  many  peace  societies, 
the  Intercollegiate  Peace  Association  among  them,  are 
just  such  persistent  activities,  which,  by  gradually  produc- 

dig  cumulative  effects,  will  ultimately  reap  their  reward. 
>ut  more  perhaps  than  other  peace  societies  does  the 
ntercollegiate  Peace  Association  concern  itself  with  the 
ocial  mind  and  the  social  conscience  of  the  future. 


INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION        11 

The  Contests.  The  first  oratorical  contest  was  held  at  _  .x 
the  University  of  Cincinnati,  May  17,  1907.  Arrange- 
ments were  made  for  the  participation  of  only  Ohio  and 
Indiana  colleges.  State  contests  were  not  held,  but  four- 
teen orations  were  submitted  from  as  many  different 
institutions,  nine  from  Ohio  and  five  from  Indiana.  The 
writers  of  eight  of  these  were  selected  by  judges  on 
thought  and  composition  to  take  part  in  the  speaking 
contest.  Four  were  from  Ohio  and  four  from  Indiana. 
Indiana  won  both  the  first  and  the  second  prize.  The 
first  prize  was  won  by  Paul  Smith  of  DePauw  Uni- 
versity with  the  subject,  "  The  Conflict  of  War  and 
Peace."  The  second  prize  went  to  Lawrence  B.  Smelser 
of  Earlham  College,  whose  subject  was  "  The  Solving 
Principles  of  Federation." 

The  second  contest  was  held  at  DePauw  University, 
May  15,  1908.  Carrying  out  the  plan  adopted  at  the 
meeting  at  Cincinnati,  the  contestants  were  selected  by 
means  of  State  contests,  and  an  invitation  was  extended , 
to  the  colleges  and  universities  of  Michigan,  Illinois,  and! 
Wisconsin  to  participate  in  the  contest.  Wisconsin  did 
not  respond,  but  contests  were  held  in  Ohio,  Indiana, 
Michigan,  and  Illinois.  By  special  arrangement  Juniata 
College  was  allowed  to  represent  Pennsylvania  without 
a  state  contest.  Glenn  P.  Wishard  of  Northwestern  Uni- 
versity won  the  first  prize  ;  subject,  "  The  United  States 
and  Universal  Peace."  The  second  prize  was  won  by 
H.  P.  Lenartz  of  Notre  Dame  University;  subject, 
"America  and  the  World's  Peace." 

The  third  Interstate  contest  took  place  at  The  Univer- 
sity of  Chicago,  May  4,  1909,  in  connection  with  the  Sec-// 
ond  National  Peace  Congress.    Ohio,  Indiana,  Michigan, 


12  PKIZE  ORATIONS 

Illinois,  and  Wisconsin  were  represented,  all  having  held 
State  contests.  Levi  T.  Pennington  of  Earlham  College 
won  the  first  prize ;  subject,  "  The  Evolution  of  World 
Peace."  The  second  prize  went  to  Harold  P.  Flint  of 
Illinois  Wesleyan  University;  subject,  "America  the 
Exemplar  of  Peace." 

The  fourth  annual  contest  was  held  at  the  University 
of  Michigan,  May  18,  1910.  There  were  six  contestants, 
Pennsylvania  having  come  regularly  into  the  association. 
Arthur  F.  Young  of  Western  Reserve  University  won 
the  first  prize ;  subject,  "  The  Waste  of  War  —  The 
Wealth  of  Peace."  The  second  prize  went  to  Glenn  N. 
Merry  of  Northwestern  University ;  subject,  "A  Nation's 
Opportunity." 

The  fifth  annual  contest  was  held  at  Johns  Hopkins 
University,  May  5,  1911,  in  connection  with  the  Third 
National  Peace  Congress.  There  were  seven  contestants, 
Maryland  being  represented  for  the  first  time.  The  first 
prize  was  won  by  Stanley  H.  Howe,  Albion  College, 
Michigan,  and  the  second  prize  by  Wayne  Walker  Cal- 
houn,  Illinois  Wesleyan  University.  Mr.  Howe's  subject 
was  "  The  Hope  of  Peace,"  and  Mr.  Calhoun's,  "  War  and 
the  Man."  This  contest  was  one  of  the  most  successful 
that  had  been  held  up  to  that  time.  It  was  greeted  by 
one  of  the  largest  audiences  that  had  attended  any  of 
the  sessions  of  the  Peace  Congress,  and  the  comparison 
of  the  orations,  in  both  thought  and  delivery,  with  the 
speeches  given  in  the  congress,  was  very  favorable  to 
the  young  orators.  A  general  enthusiasm  was  evoked 
for  the  contests.  Yet  there  was  much  fear  that  this  con- 
test might  prove  to  be  the  last,  there  being  no  assurance 


INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION        13 

ahead  for  adequate  funds  to  carry  on  the  work.  It  was 
decided,  however,  not  to  give  up  without  further  trial, 
a  decision  well  justified  by  subsequent  developments. 

Assistance  being  secured  from  the  Carnegie  peace 
fund,  eleven  states  held  contests  in  1912.  In  addition 
to  the  seven  that  participated  in  the  contest  at  Baltimore, 
four  additional  states  were  added  —  New  York,  North 
Carolina,  Iowa,  and  Nebraska.  With  so  many  states,  it 
became  necessary  for  the  first  time  to  divide  them  into 
groups.  Two  groups  were  formed,  an  Eastern  and  a 
Western.  The  Western  Group,  of  five  states,  held  its 
contest  at  Monmouth  College,  Illinois,  April  26,  and 
the  Eastern  Group,  of  six  states,  at  Allegheny  College, 
Pennsylvania,  May  3.  No  prizes  were  given  at  either  of 
these  contests,  but  an  arrangement  was  made  with  the 
Lake  Mohonk  Conference  by  which  the  ranking  orator 
in  each  contest  should  meet  and  contest  for  first  and 
second  place  at  Mohonk  Lake  at  the  time  of  the  Lake 
Mohonk  Conference.  The  contest  at  Mohonk  was  held 
May  16,  the  contestants  being  Percival  V.  Blanshard  of 
the  University  of  Michigan,  who  represented  the  Western 
Group,  and  Russell  Weisman  of  Western  Reserve  Uni- 
versity, who  represented  the  Eastern  Group.  The  title 
of  Mr.  Blanshard's  oration  was  "  The  Roosevelt  Theory 
of  War,"  and  that  of  Mr.  Weisman's,  "  National  Honor 
and  Vital  Interests."  The  Misses  Seabury  gave  a  first 
prize  of  $75  and  a  second  prize  of  $50.  The  judges 
awarded  the  first  prize  to  Mr.  Blanshard  and  the  second 
prize  to  Mr.  Weisman.  So  great,  however,  was  the  inter- 
est of  the  guests  at  Mohonk  Lake,  and  so  nearly  equal 
in  merit  were  the  orations,  that  a  gentleman  present  gave 


14  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

an  additional  $25  to  Mr.  Weisman  to  make  the  prizes 
equal,  and  Mr.  Joshua  Bailey  of  Philadelphia  gave  each 
of  the  contestants  an  additional  $50. 

Five  additional  states  —  Maine,  Massachusetts,  Texas, 
Missouri,  and  South  Dakota  —  participated  in  the  contests 
of  1913,  making  sixteen  states  holding  contests.  Of  these 
states  three  groups  were  formed,  an  Eastern,  a  Central, 
and  a  Western.  The  Central  Group  held  its  contest 
at  Goshen  College,  Indiana,  April  25 ;  the  Western 
Group  at  St.  Louis,  May  1,  as  part  of  the  program  of 
the  Fourth  American  Peace  Congress ;  and  the  Eastern 
Group  at  Lafayette  College,  Pennsylvania,  May  13.  The 
same  arrangements  were  made  as  in  the  preceding  year 
—  that  the  contestant  holding  the  highest  rank  in  each 
group  should  meet  in  a  final  contest  at  Mohonk  Lake. 
No  prizes  were  given,  except  that  the  Business  Men's 
League  of  St.  Louis  gave  a  prize  of  $100  for  the  contest 
at  St.  Louis.  The  contest  at  Mohonk  was  held  May  15, 
and  three  prizes  were  given  by  the  Misses  Seabury  — 
$100,  $75,  and  $50.  Paul  B.  Blanshard  of  the  Univer- 
sity of  Michigan,  a  twin  brother  of  the  Mr.  Blanshard  who 
won.  the  first  prize  in  1912,  represented  the  Central  Group 
and  won  the  first  prize  with  the  subject,  "  The  Evolution 
of  "Patriotism."  Calvert  Magruder,  St.  John's  College, 
Annapolis,  Maryland,  represented  the  Eastern  Group  and 
won  the  second  prize.  His  subject  was  "  Certain  Phases  of 
the  Peace  Movement."  Vernon  M.  Welsh,  Knox  College, 
Illinois,  represented  the  Western  Group  and  won  the 
third  prize.  His  subject  was  "  The  Assurance  of  Peace." 

Growth.  The  growth  of  the  Intercollegiate  Peace  Asso- 
ciation, like  that  of  most  social  movements,  was  slow  in 
the  first  few  years  of  its  existence,  but  with  the  gradual 


INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION        15 

accretion  of  new  states  it  has  gained  in  momentum,  and 
is  to-day  increasing  with  such  rapidity  that  only  the  lack 
of  financial  support  will  prevent  it  from  embracing  in  its 
contests  within  another  two  years  practically  every  state 
in  the  Union.  Starting  with  two  states  at  the  Earlham 
Conference  in  1906  and  the  first  contest  in  1907,  it  added 
three  states  in  1908,  one  in  1910,  and  one  in  1911,  mak- 
ing seven  states  participating  in  the  contests  of  1911. 
Four  more  states  were  added  for  the  contests  of  1912, 
and  five  additional  ones  for  the  contests  of  1913  (nine 
states  in  two  years),  making  sixteen  states  in  all.  Since 
the  contest  in  May,  1913,  eight  states  have  been  added 
for  the  contests  of  1914,  while  the  work  of  organization 
is  being  carried  on  in  several  other  states.  By  1915  at  * 
least  thirty  states  will  be  holding  contests  if  money  can 
be  secured  for  properly  financing  them.  Four  groups 
are  now  definitely  organized:  an  Eastern,  a  Central,  &_J 
Western,  and  a  Southern.  A  Pacific  Group  is  in  process 
of  being  organized.  Thus,  in  seven  years  from  the  first 
contest  we  have  become  a  national  association,  extend- 
ing from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Pacific  and  from  the  Lakes 
to  the  Gulf. 

Prizes  and  Finances.  In  order  to  encourage  the  young 
men  to  enter  the  contests,  the  plan  of  offering  prizes  was 
adopted  at  the  outset.  The  national  association  made  it- 
self responsible  for  the  state  prizes,  leaving  the  local 
institutions  to  provide  for  such  local  prizes  as  they  could 
arrange  for.  In  some  places  such  prizes  are  given,  being 
provided  for  in  different  ways,  and  in  some  places  no 
local  prizes  are  given.  At  first  only  $50  and  $25  were 
given  for  the  two  state  prizes,  but  after  the  second  year 
it  was  made  a  definite  policy  of  the  association  to  make 


16  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

the  first  state  prize  $75  and  the  second  prize  $50.  With 
rare  exceptions,  in  the  case  of  the  second  prize,  this 
policy  is  now  maintained.  In  New  York,  however,  there 
is  a  first  prize  of  $200  and  a  second  prize  of  $100,  given 
by  Mrs.  Elmer  Black.  For  the  past  two  or  three  years 
the  national  association  has  made  itself  responsible  for 
the  first  prize  only,  leaving  the  states  to  look  after  the 
second  prize,  though  the  secretary  also  looks  after  many 
of  the  second  prizes.  No  prizes  are  regularly  given  in 
the  group  contests,  but  it  is  hoped  that  a  plan  may  be 
evolved  for  giving  one  prize,  as  the  expenses  of  the 
winning  contestant  are  large.  At  the  national  contest 
at  Mohonk  Lake,  prizes  are  given  to  each  contestant.  In 
1914  these  prizes  will  probably  range  from  $40  to  $100. 
The  prize  money  has  come  from  various  sources.  In 

/  1908  Mr.  Carnegie  gave  $1000,  and  in  1909  he  gave 
f  $700.  The  Misses  Seabury,  of  New  Bedford,  Massachu- 

/  setts,  gave  $500  a  year  from  the  first.  They  gave  $750 
in  1913  and  will  give  $1000  for  prizes  in  1914.  In 
Illinois  La  Verne  W.  Noyes  has  annually  given  the  first 
prize  of  $75  and  Harlow  N.  Higginbotham  the  second 
prize  of  $50.  In  Michigan  R.  E.  Olds  gave  the  first 
prize  until  1913,  and  J.  H.  Moores  the  second  prize 
until  1914.  In  Ohio  Samuel  Mather  and  J.  G.  Schmid- 
lapp  furnish  the  prizes  for  1914.  In  New  York,  Mas- 
sachusetts, Pennsylvania,  and  Maryland  the  prizes  are 
given  by  individuals  at  the  instigation  of  peace  societies. 
In  some  states  the  second  prize  is  given  by  some  indi- 
vidual or  through  a  collection  from  a  number  of  individ- 
uals. The  balance  of  the  prizes  are  paid  out  of  the 
/subvention  of  $1200  that  has  been  allowed  for  the  past 
three  years  out  of  the  Carnegie  endowment  fund.  In 


INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION        17 

1913  the  prizes  amounted  to  $2400.  In  1914  they  ap- 
proximate $3400,  apart  from  any  local  prizes  that  may 
be  given. 

The  annual  subvention  of  $1200  from  the  Carnegie] 
peace  fund  is  wholly  inadequate  to  meet  the  growing  j 
needs   of  this    association.    Since   this    subvention   was/ 
first  granted,  the  number  of  states  has  been  more  tharj 
doubled,  and  it  takes  about  $600  a  year  to  run  the  secf 
retary's  office.    Unless  more  money  is  secured  from  som^ 
source,  the  association  will  be  unable  to  grow  beyond 
its  present  limits. 

Officers  and  Organization.  The  organization  of  the 
Intercollegiate  Peace  Association  has  been  a  gradual 
development,  and  has  undergone  modifications  to  meet 
the  changing  conditions  due  to  the  considerable  enlarge- 
ment of  the  territory  embraced  within  its  sphere  of  ac- 
tivity, chief  of  which  has  been  the  practical  impossibility 
of  getting  representatives  to  a  national  meeting  from 
such  a  large  extent  of  territory.  At  first  there  were  a 
president,  secretary,  and  treasurer,  and  an  executive  com- 
mittee, with  the  college  presidents  of  Ohio  and  Indiana 
as  vice  presidents.  At  the  meeting  at  DePauw  Univer- 
sity, in  1908,  it  was  decided  to  create  state  committees, 
that  should  have  charge  of  the  work  in  their  respective 
states.  As  the  states  grew  in  numbers  the  plan  of  having 
vice  presidents  was  abandoned.  In  1911  the  chairmen  of 
the  state  committees  were  made  members  of  an  advisory 
council,  and  in  1913  the  executive  committee  was  reor- 
ganized so  that  there  should  be  one  member  from  each 
group  of  states  in  addition  to  the  president  and  sec- 
retary. When  the  organization  is  fully  matured  the 
elected  members  of  the  executive  committee  will  be  a 


18  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

self-perpetuating  body,  only  one  or  two  going  out  of 
office  in  any  one  year,  reelection  being  permitted.  The 
executive  committee  will  elect  the  president,  executive 
secretary,  and  treasurer,  and  the  president  and  the  execu- 
tive secretary  will  appoint  the  members  of  the  advisory 
council,  who  will  be  ex-officio  chairmen  of  the  state  com- 
mittees. The  officers  up  to  date  have  been  as  follows : 

Presidents  :  Dean  William  P.  Rogers,  Cincinnati  Law 
School,  1906-1907;  Professor  George  W.  Knight,  Ohio 
State  University,  1907-1908;  Professor  Elbert  Russell, 
Earlham  College,  1908-1910  ;  Dean  William  P.  Rogers, 
1910-1911;  President  Charles  F.  Thwing,  Western 
Reserve  University,  1911-. 

Secretaries:  Professor  Elbert  Russell,  1906-1908; 
Mr.  George  Fulk,  Cerro  Gordo,  Illinois,  1908-1911; 
Professor  Stephen  F.  Weston,  Antioch  College,  1911-. 

Treasurers:  Professor  Elbert  Russell,  1906-1908; 
Professor  Stephen  F.  Weston,  1908  -. 

Orations.  In  the  seven  years  in  which  the  contests 
have  been  held,  about  twelve  hundred  orations  have 
been  written,  a  little  more  than  one  half  of  these  in  the 
past  two  years.  The  number  written  in  1914  will  not 
fall  far  short  of  five  hundred.  For  some  time  we  have 
desired  to  publish  a  volume  of  the  prize  orations,  and 
within  the  past  few  years  there  has  been  considerable 
demand  for  such  a  volume,  as  many  would-be  contestants 
are  anxious  to  see  what  they  will  have  to  measure 
up  to  in  order  to  win.  Outsiders  interested  in  the  con- 
tests have  also  desired  such  a  publication.  The  present 
/collection  was  therefore  projected,  and  the  World  Peace 
Foundation  willingly  undertook  to  issue  it  as  one  of  the 
books  in  its  International  Library. 


INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION         19 

The  ten  orations  that  have  been  selected  for  this 
volume  out  of  the  twelve  hundred  have  all  won  the  first 
prize  in  interstate  contests.  The  first  five  are  the  first 
prize  orations  in  the  national  contests  of  the  first  five 
years  before  the  group  contests  were  organized,  and  were 
selected  by  a  series  of  local,  state,  and  interstate  contests 
out  of  about  five  hundred  and  fifty  orations  delivered. 
The  last  five,  selected  by  a  series  of  contests  out  of 
about  six  hundred  and  fifty,  are  the  first  prize  orations 
of  the  group  contests  of  the  past  two  years.  They  were 
delivered  in  the  national  contests  at  Mohonk  Lake  at 
the  time  of  the  Lake  Mohonk  Conferences.  The  fact 
that  many  of  the  second  prize  orations,  and  indeed  a 
number  of  the  others,  were  given  first  place  by  some  of 
the  judges  is  indicative  of  the  general  high  character  of 
all  the  orations,  so  that  the  ten  selected  orations  are 
very  fairly  typical  of  the  thought  and  sentiment  of  the 
whole  twelve  hundred.  It  is  therefore  believed  that  the 
publication  of  these  orations  will  be  of  great  value  not 
only  as  a  stimulus  to  prospective  contestants  but  as  a 
convincing  proof  of  the  quality  of  the  work  that  the 
undergraduate  students  of  the  country  are  doing  in  the 
contests.  They  are  evidence  that  these  contests  call  out 
a  high  grade  of  intellectual  and  moral  culture,  showing 
as  they  do  keen  and  clear  thinking  and  high  moral  ideals. 

There  is  included  as  an  appendix  to  these  orations  the 
Pugsley  prize  oration  of  1913,  by  Bryant  Smith,  a  senior 
in  Guilford  College,  North  Carolina,  a  sample  of  the 
prize  essays  annually  submitted  for  the  Pugsley  prize 
of  $100  offered  through  the  Lake  Mohonk  Conference 
by  Chester  DeWitt  Pugsley  of  Yonkers,  New  York. 
The  essay  is  also  fittingly  printed  in  this  volume  because 


20  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

Mr.  Smith  represented  the  state  of  North  Carolina  in 
the  Eastern  Group  contest  of  the  Intercollegiate  Peace 
Association  in  1912,  while  still  another  reason  for  includ- 
ing it  is  the  hope  that  others  who  have  taken  part  in  the 
oratorical  contests,  and  who  are  thereby  excluded  from 
entering  those  contests  again,  may  be  encouraged  to  try 
for  the  Pugsley  prize. 

Subjects  of  Orations.    In  view  of  the  fact  that  so  many 
orations  have  been  written  on  peace  subjects,  it  is  wor- 
thy of  note  that  the  topics  have  seldom  been  duplicated, 
and  that  when  the  same  topic  has  been  twice  used,  the 
handling  of  it  has  been  so  different  that  little  duplica- 
tion has  been  noticeable.    Each  oration  well  represents 
the  originality  and  the   individuality  of  the  writer  or 
orator.     Duplication  is  shown  in  the  quotations,  and  it 
is  therefore  suggested  that  quotations  be  sparingly  used. 
^_^Not  the  least  interesting  feature  of  the  orations  is 
I   the  combination  of  idealism  and  practicality,  which  they 
1  reveal  in   the  minds  of  the   contestants.    Truly,   these 
young  men  "  have  hitched  their  wagon  to  a  star,"  the 
star  of  universal  good  will. 

To  show  the  wide  range  of  subjects  chosen,  and  there- 
fore the  scope  and  many-sidedness  of  the  peace  question, 
the  following  list  of  titles  already  used  is  given  here. 
They  are  also  given  as  suggestions  to  future  writers  of 
orations,  for  there  is  no  objection  to  choosing  subjects 
previously  used.  Even  if  there  is  some  duplication  of 
thought,  it  makes  little  difference,  since  the  contests  are 
seldom  held  twice  in  the  same  place.  Included  in  the  list 
are  some  titles  that  show  variations  in  the  way  of  stating 
the  same  thing,  and  these  variations  should  be  suggestive 
to  future  writers  of  orations. 


INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION         21 


PARTIAL  LIST  OF  SUBJECTS 


America  the  Exemplar  of  Peace 

America  and  the  World's  Peace 

America's  Mission  in  the  Peace 
Movement 

America's  Mission  to  Mankind 

America's  Obligation 

The  Arbiter  of  the  World 

Arbitration  versus  War 

The  Challenge  of  Thor 

The  Conflict  of  War  and  Peace 

A  Congress  of  Nations 

The  Cost  of  Militarism 

The  Cost  of  Peace 

The  Crucial  Parallelism 

The  Dawn  of  Peace 

The  Dawn  of  Universal  Peace 

Democracy  and  Peace 

Diplomacy  and  Peace 

Disillusionment 

The  Dominant  Ideal   - 

The  End  ;  and  the  Means 

The  Evolution  of  a  Higher 
Patriotism 

The  Evolution  of  Justice 

The  Evolution  of  Law 

The  Evolution  of  National 
Greatness  as  a  World  Peace- 
maker 

The  Evolution  of  World  Peace 

The  Fallacy  of  the  Economics 
of  War 

The  Federation  of  the  World 

Forces  of  War  and  Peace 

The  Foundations 

From  Chaos  to  Harmony 


From  History's  Pages  —  Peace 
Fruits  of  War  and   Fruits  of 

Peace 
Government  and  International 

Peace 

The  Growing  Sentiment 
The  Growth  of  the  Peace  Move- 
ment 

Honor  Satisfied 
The  Ideal  of  the  Century 
Idealism  and  the  Peace  Move- 
ment 

Immigration  and  Peace 
The  Inefficiency  of  War 
Instead  of  War  — What? 
International  Arbitration 
International  Justice  and  World 

Peace 

International  Peace 
International    Peace    and    the 

Prince  of  Peace 
Justice  and  Peace 
Justice  by  War  or  Peace 
The  Keynote  of  the  Twentieth 

Century 

The  Lasting  Wound 
The  Law  of  Peace 
The  Message  of  the  Andes 
Military  Selection  and  its  Effect 

on  National  Life 
Modern  Battlefields 
A  Nation's  Opportunity 
The  New  Anglo-Saxon 
The  New  Brotherhood 
The  New  Corner  Stone 


22 


PRIZE  ORATIONS 


The  New  Era 

The  New  Nobility 

The  New  Patriotism 

The  Next  Step 

The  Panama  Canal 

The  Passing  of  War 

The  Pathway  to  Peace 

Patriotism  and  Peace 

Peace  and  Armaments 

Peace    and    the    Evolution    of 

Conscience 
Peace  and  the  Fortification  of 

the  Panama  Canal 
Peace  and  Public  Opinion 
Peace  Inevitable 
Peace  is  our  Passion 
Peace  on  Earth 
Peace,  our  Great  Ideal 
The  Philosophy   of    Universal 

Peace 
Physical  and  Psychical  Aspects 

of  War 

A  Plea  for  International  Peace 
A  Plea  for  Peace 
Popular  Fallacies  about  War 
Popular  Government  and  Peace 
Popular  Sentiment  and  Purer 

Citizenship :  The  Right  Road 

to  Peace 
The    Power    of    International 

Tolerance 

The  Prince  of  Peace 
Progress  toward  Justice 
The  Proposed  Court  of  Arbitral 

Justice 

The  Rationality  of  Peace 
The  Real  Power 
The  Redemption  of  Patriotism 


The  Regaining  of  the  World's 
Lost  Legacy 

Right  or  Might 

The  Significance  of  the  Hague 
Conferences 

The  Rightful  Ruler 

A  Simple  Method  of  Forward- 
ing Universal  Peace 

The  Solving  Principles  of  Fed- 
eration 

Sovereignty  in  Arbitration 

Statesmanship     versus    Battle- 
ship 

Thor  or  Christ 

Ungrateful  America 

The  United  States  and  Univer- 
sal Peace 

The  United  States  of  the  World 

Universal  Peace  and  the 
Brotherhood  of  Man 

The  Unnecessary  Evil 

A  Vision  of  a  Conquest 

War  and  Christianity 

War  —  The  Demoralizer 

War  and  its  Elimination 

War  and  the  Laboring  Man 

War  and  the  Man 

War  for  Profit 

War  —  Universal  Brotherhood 
—  Peace 

The  Warrior's  Protest  against 
War 

The     Waste     of     War  —  The 
Wealth    of    Peace 

The  Way  of  Peace 

What,  from  Vengeance  ? 

World  Federation 

The  World  Organization 


INTERCOLLEGIATE  PEACE  ASSOCIATION         23 

Acknowledgments.  The  Intercollegiate  Peace  Associa- 
tion is  greatly  indebted  to  many  state  and  city  peace 
societies  for  cooperation  and  assistance.  They  have 
materially  strengthened  our  work  and  made  possible  the 
enlargement  of  the  field  of  our  activities.  To  their  secre- 
taries we  are  deeply  indebted.  The  fullest  cooperation 
of  the  peace  societies,  each  assisting  and  supplementing 
the  work  of  others  wherever  possible,  will  bring  the  most 
fruitful  and  the  most  speedy  results,  and  the  fact  that 
we  have  received  such  cooperation  indicates  a  full  appre- 
ciation of  the  value  of  the  work  being  done  in  these 
contests.  We  wish  also  to  express  our  gratitude  to  the 
many  individual  contributors  of  prizes,  especially  to  the 
Misses  Seabury,  for  their  interest,  encouragement,  and 
generosity,  because  without  their  assistance  our  associa- 
tion could  not  have  survived.  To  the  Misses  Seabury 
we  are  also  under  obligation  for  lending  their  rights  over 
the  texts  of  orations  for  this  publication.  For  the  sub- 
vention from  the  Carnegie  Endowment  for  International 
Peace  we  thank  the  American  Peace  Society,  through 
whose  agency  it  comes  to  us.  For  the  publication  of  this 
volume  we  are  deeply  grateful  to  the  World  Peace 
Foundation,  without  whose  cooperation  the  book  could 
not  have  been  published.  To  Edwin  D.  Mead  and 
Denys  P.  Myers  the  editor  owes  his  sincere  thanks  for 
suggestions  and  corrections  of  the  manuscript.  We  trust 
that  the  volume  will  be  amply  justified  by  the  good  that 

it  will  do. 

STEPHEN  F.  WESTON 

Executive  Secretary 


24  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

SUPPLEMENT 

The  Contests  of  1914.  This  volume  was  projected  to 
be  published  before  the  Lake  Mohonk  Conference  in  May, 
but  it  was  decided  to  include  the  five  orations  given 
in  the  national  contest  of  1914,  and  so  make  the  volume 
complete  for  the  year  of  issue.  The  last  five  orations, 
then,  are  the  winning  ones  in  the  group  contests  of 
1914,  contesting  for  place  in  the  national  contest  at 
Mohonk  Lake,  May  16,  1914.  They  are  the  picked  ora- 
tions of  over  four  hundred  and  fifty  prepared  in  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty  colleges  and  universities,  representing 
twenty-two  states.  The  fifteen  orations  in  the  volume 
are  the  winning  orations  out  of  more  than  sixteen  hun- 
dred and  fifty  written  by  the  student  body  of  the  country 
in  the  past  eight  years. 

In  1914  six  additional  states  took  part  in  the  con- 
tests, making  twenty- two  organized  into  five  groups.  The 
Pacific  coast  and  Southern  groups  were  added  during 
the  year  to  the  three  groups  organized  in  1913.  Three 
of  the  groups  held  their  contests  on  May  1 — the  North 
Atlantic  at  the  College  of  the  City  of  New  York,  the 
Central  at  Western  Reserve  University,  and  the  Western 
at  Des  Moines  College.  The  Southern  Group  held  its 
contest  at  Vanderbilt  University  on  May  10.  On  the 
Pacific  coast  only  Oregon  was  ready,  and  the  winner  of 
her  state  contest  was  permitted  to  represent  the  group 
in  the  national  contest.  Utah  and  California  are  plan- 
ning to  enter  the  contests  of  1915.  Virginia,  West 
Virginia,  and  South  Carolina  are  organizing,  and  a  sixth 
group  will  then  be  formed  —  the  South  Atlantic  Group. 

S.  F.  W. 


THE  CONFLICT  OF  WAR  AND  PEACE 

By  PAUL  SMITH,  DePauw  University,  Greencastle,  Indiana 

First  Prize  Oration  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  the 
University  of  Cincinnati,  May  17,  1907 


THE  CONFLICT  OF  WAR  AND  PEACE 

The  past  ages  have  witnessed  a  long  conflict  between 
two  opposing  principles  —  the  principle  of  might  and  the 
principle  of  right.  The  first  instituted  the  duel  between 
equals  and  condemned  the  impotent  to  slavery ;  the 
second  ordained  the  courts  of  civil  justice  and  signed 
the  Emancipation  Proclamation.  The  principle  of  might 
licensed  despotism  and  degraded  the  many  in  the  service 
of  the  few ;  the  principle  of  right  proclaimed  democracy 
and  consecrated  the  few  to  the  service  of  the  many. 
Thus  in  the  realm  of  the  individual  and  of  the  state  the 
diviner  conception  has  won  its  triumphs,  and  to-day  force 
is  tolerated  only  as  it  serves  the  cause  of  justice.  But 
in  the  larger  international  sphere  the  advocates  of  might 
prolong  the  ancient  cry  for  war ;  the  disciples  of  right 
protest  in  a  gentler  demand  for  peace. 

The  partisans  of  war  urge  four  capital  reasons  in  be- 
half of  their  principle :  personal  glory,  moral  education, 
class  interest,  and  national  egoism. 

We  have  as  a  heritage  of  our  military  past,  not  a  sense 
of  the  grim  tragedy  of  war,  but  traditions  which  award 
the  highest  meed  of  personal  glory  to  the  warrior.  The 
roster  of  the  world's  heroes  contains  two  classes  of 
names  —  great  soldiers  and  great  altruists.  Poet  and 
orator  and  populace  unite  to  do  honor  to  him  who  was 
not  afraid  to  fight  and  to  die  for  his  home,  his  king,  his 
liberty,  his  country,  his  convictions.  Bravery  has  ever 
won  its  laurel  crown,  for  an  instinct  within  us  applauds 

27 


28  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

physical  courage  and  aggressiveness.  And  the  gilded 
uniform  and  clanking  sword,  the  drumbeat  and  the 
bugle  call,  the  camp  fire  and  the  "  far-flung  battle  line," 
stand  as  the  most  dramatic  expressions  of  a  deep  senti- 
ment, primitive  and  thrilling. 

Akin  to  this  martial  hero  worship  is  the  argument  that 
success  in  war  gives  training  for  the  higher  contests  of 
peace.  Out  of  the  war  of  1776  the  nation  took  George 
Washington  for  President;  out  of  the  Mexican  War, 
Zachary  Taylor ;  out  of  the  Civil  War,  General  Grant ; 
out  of  the  Spanish  War,  Theodore  Roosevelt.  The  badge 
of  the  Grand  Army  of  the  Republic  is  a  certificate  of 
merit.  The  cross  of  the  Legion  of  Honor  opens  the  door 
to  social  and  political  and  business  prosperity.  Battle  is 
regarded  as  a  supreme  test  of  sturdy  manhood,  and  the 
harsh  discipline  of  the  camp  as  education  for  the  finer 
arts  of  the  council.  War  creates  a  heroism  which  later 
devotes  itself  to  spiritual  ends. 

Moreover,  say  the  advocates,  the  interests  of  class  re- 
quire force  for  their  conservation.  The  hereditary  nobility 
of  Europe  was  founded  by  military  process  for  military 
purposes,  and,  with  the  passing  of  war,  loses  its  warrant 
for  existence.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  claimed  that  the 
under  classes  may  come  into  the  enjoyment  of  their  in- 
alienable rights,  common  to  all  humanity,  only  by  means 
of  the  sword.  Witness  the  peasantry  of  Russia !  Even 
in  America  so  great  a  prophet  as  Henry  Ward  Beecher 
foresaw  a  tragic  day  when  the  bivouac  of  capital  would 
be  set  against  the  camp  of  labor.  And  lesser  seers  are 
not  lacking  who  freely  predict,  even  for  our  democratic 
land,  a  desperate  rebellion  of  a  proletariat  of  poverty 
against  an  aristocracy  of  wealth. 


THE  CONFLICT  OF  WAR  AND  PEACE  29 

Finally,  the  demands  of  national  egoism  are  urged 
in  behalf  of  war.  For  example,  Japan  needs  new  terri- 
tory for  her  growing  millions  and  must  assume  the 
conqueror's  role.  Or  France  goes  mad  with  the  lust  of 
empire  and  goes  forth  untamed  until  the  day  of  Waterloo. 
Or  Great  Britain  must  have  new  markets ;  and,  falsely 
reasoning  that  trade  follows  the  flag,  and  the  flag  fol- 
lows the  bayonet,  she  seizes  a  realm  upon  which  the  sun 
may  never  set.  Or  the  interests  of  white  men  and  yel- 
low men,  of  black  men  or  red  men,  clash ;  and  then  the 
cannon  must  be  the  final  test,  might  must  make  right, 
and  the  strongest  must  survive.  The  greed  of  territorial 
aggrandizement,  the  spirit  of  national  adventure,  the 
longing  for  commercial  supremacy,  the  honor  of  a  coun- 
try, the  pride  of  racial  achievement  —  each  is  urged  to 
justify  the  necessity  for  bloodshed  and  carnage.  Such 
are  the  arguments  of  the  advocates  of  war. 

To  balance  these,  the  advocates  of  peace  plead  four 
greater  considerations :  against  personal  glory,  the  eco- 
nomic cost  of  militarism ;  against  the  moral  education 
of  war,  the  higher  heroism  of  peace ;  against  class  inter- 
ests, the  sanctity  of  human  life;  and  against  national 
egoism,  the  deeper  spirit  of  national  altruism. 

A  single  modern  battleship  costs  more  than  the  com- 
bined value  of  the  property  and  endowment  of  all  the 
colleges  of  a  certain  great  state.  Two  thirds  of  the 
money  passing  through  the  treasury  of  the  Republic 
goes  to  the  support  of  the  military  system.  Computing 
two  hundred  dollars  a  year  as  the  average  loss  to  society 
occasioned  by  the  withdrawal  of  each  soldier  and  sailor 
from  productive  toil,  and  adding  this  sum  to  the  war 
budgets  of  the  nations  for  the  past  fifty  years,  we  obtain 


30  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

a  total  of  billions,  beyond  the  reach  of  all  imagination. 
The  money  which  armies,  navies,  wars,  and  pensions 
have  cost  the  world  in  fifty  years  would  have  installed 
in  China  a  system  of  education  equal  to  that  of  the 
United  States ;  would  have  transformed  the  arid  deserts 
of  India  into  a  modern  Eden  by  irrigation ;  would  have 
laid  railways  from  Cape  Town  to  the  remotest  corner  of 
Africa;  would  have  dug  the  Panama  Canal;  and,  in 
addition,  would  have  sent  a  translation  of  the  Bible,  of 
Shakespeare,  Homer,  Goethe,  and  Dante  to  every  family 
on  the  globe.  In  a  word,  the  wealth  spent  on  wars  in 
the  last  half  century  would  have  transformed  life  for  a 
majority  of  human  beings.  The  stoppage  of  this  waste 
will  shorten  the  hours  of  labor,  reduce  pauperism,  ele- 
vate the  peasantry  of  Europe,  lighten  taxation,  and  work 
an  economic  revolution. 

The  argument  for  moral  education  mistakes  national 
gratitude  to  warriors  for  tribute  to  the  training  of  the 
camp.  But  grant  that  war  develops  the  combative  quali- 
ties, the  argument  forgets  a  darker  moral  phase.  It  for- 
gets the  moral  wrecks  which  are  the  sad  products  of  war ; 
it  forgets  the  effect  of  the  loss  of  the  refining  influence  of 
womanhood  upon  the  soldier ;  it  forgets  the  debasement 
of  sinking  men  to  the  physical  type  of  life.  And  the  argu- 
ment assumes  that  peace  has  no  "  equivalent  for  war," 
declared  by  a  famous  educator  to  be  the  greatest  need  of 
the  age.  Courage  and  endurance  are  as  necessary  in  social 
reforms  as  in  carnal  battle.  To  wrestle  against  principali- 
ties and  powers  and  rulers  of  the  world-darkness  calls 
forth  the  maximum  powers  of  manhood.  Wendell  Phillips 
stands  in  the  ranks  of  heroes  as  high  as  Philip  Sheridan. 
The  moral  loss  from  war  transcends  the  moral  gain. 


1HE  CONFLICT  OF  WAR  AND  PEACE  31 

Yet  war  levies  toll  more  tragic  than  any  toll  of  dol- 
lars, more  appalling  than  any  moral  cost.  A  famous 
painting  reveals  the  world's  conquerors,  Xerxes,  Caesar, 
Alexander,  Napoleon,  and  a  lesser  host,  mounted  proudly 
on  battle  steeds,  caparisoned  with  gorgeous  trappings ; 
but  the  field  through  which  they  march  is  paved  with 
naked,  mutilated  corpses,  the  ghastly  price  of  glory.  The 
trenches  at  Port  Arthur  were  filled  level-full  with  the 
bodies  of  self -sacrificed  martyrs,  and  upon  this  gruesome 
slope  the  final  charges  were  made.  Stripped  of  all  senti- 
ment, war  is  organized  and  wholesale  murder,  a  savage 
and  awful  paradox  which  proclaims  the  shallowness  of 
civilization.  Said  General  Sherman :  "  Only  those  who 
have  never  heard  a  shot,  only  those  who  have  never 
heard  the  shrieks  of  the  wounded  nor  the  groans  of  the 
dying,  can  cry  aloud  for  more  blood,  more  vengeance, 
more  desolation."  God  grant  the  world  may  soon  heed 
the  Voice,  sounding  down  from  the  solemnity  of  Sinai, 
laying  the  divine  command  upon  each  man  and  each 
nation :  "  Thou  shalt  not  kill !  " 

There  yet  remains  the  ethical  argument  for  peace. 
Will  any  one  say  that  the  supreme  duty  of  altruism  is 
binding  upon  men  as  individuals,  and  not  binding  upon 
the  same  men  acting  conjointly  as  a  nation  ?  When  the 
people  and  the  statesmen  of  one  nation  are  able  to  put 
themselves  in  the  places  of  the  statesmen  and  of  the 
people  of  another  nation ;  when  there  is  a  common  will 
to  do  international  justice  rather  than  to  despise  the 
weaker  country ;  when  not  selfish  interest  alone,  but  the 
greatest  good  of  the  greatest  number,  becomes  the  driv- 
ing impulse  of  humanity ;  when  the  thrill  of  fraternity 
crosses  geographical  lines  and  pauses  not  011  the  shores 


32  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

of  the  seas  —  then  war  will  be  impossible,  the  energies  of 
the  world  will  turn  to  the  constructive  arts,  and  from 
the  midst  of  contentment  unshadowed  by  hunger,  from 
prosperity  unmenaced  by  want,  in  the  peaceful  spirit  of 
the  Christ,  the  world  will  sing : 

"  The  crest  and  crowning  of  all  good,  life's  final  star  is  brother- 
hood ; 

For  it  will  bring  again  to  Earth  her  long-lost  Poesy  and  Mirth  ; 

Will  send  new  light  on  every  face,  a  kingly  power  upon  the  race. 

And  till  it  come,  we  men  are  slaves,  and  travel  downward  to  dust 
of  graves. 

Come,  clear  the  way,  then,  clear  the  way :  blind  creeds  and  kings 
have  had  their  day. 

Break  the  dead  branches  from  the  path :  our  hope  is  in  the 
aftermath. 

Our  hope  is  in  heroic  men,  star-led  to  build  the  world  again. 

To  this  Event  the  ages  ran  :  Make  way  for  Brotherhood  —  make 
way  for  man." 

All  great  reforms  have  begun  with  "  star-led "  men 
and  have  moved  from  individuals  to  groups  and  from 
groups  to  the  nation.  In  every  distinct  advance  of  the 
race  prophetic  persons  have  anticipated  the  trend  of 
the  ages  and  have  adopted  new  codes  for  themselves; 
the  higher  morality  has  spread  by  agitation  to  include  a 
larger  group,  and  finally  it  has  become  the  policy  of  the 
nation.  Thus  slavery  went,  and  political  equality  came. 

And  thus  war  must  go  and  peace  must  come.  First, 
w^e  find  protest  against  the  killing  of  individuals  by 
individuals.  The  duel  fell  into  disrepute  and  at  last  was 
forbidden  by  law.  The  carrying  of  weapons  became  un- 
fashionable and  at  length  was  made  a  crime.  With  the 
growth  of  the  moral  sense,  mutual  trust  took  the  place 
of  armed  neutrality.  The  present  situation  is  ready  for 


THE  CONFLICT  OF  WAR  AND  PEACE  33 

the  larger  application  of  these  principles.  The  argument 
which  abolished  the  carrying  of  weapons  must  frown 
upon  excessive  national  armaments.  As  the  individual 
duel  was  superseded  by  personal  arbitration,  so  the 
national  duel  must  be  superseded  by  national  arbitration. 
The  reason  that  maintains  the  civil  court  for  the  settle- 
ment of  individuals'  disputes  calls  for  a  higher  court  for 
the  settlement  of  national  disputes.  Not  alone  among 
men,  not  alone  within  states,  but  among  the  nations, 
right,  not  might,  must  rule ;  not  force,  but  justice ;  and 
written  as  the  world's  supreme  mandate,  as  the  highest 
human  law  from  which  there  may  be  no  appeal,  must  be 
the  unshaken  law  of  national  righteousness. 

Tennyson's  words  were  accounted  a  poet's  fancy  when 
he  wrote : 

Till  the  war  drum  throbs  no  longer,  and  the  battle-flags  are  furl'd 
In  the  Parliament  of  man,  the  Federation  of  the  world. 

Yet  the  present  year 1  will  witness  the  fulfillment  of  that 
prophecy.  Disarmament  and  arbitration  will  be  consid- 
ered this  summer,  not  by  agitators,  not  by  theorists,  nor 
yet  prophetically  by  poets  ;  but  in  June,  at  the  invitation 
of  our  own  President,2  an  actual  international  conference 
will  assemble,  a  Parliament  of  the  World,  composed  of 
official  representatives  of  every  nation  of  the  globe. 
Thus  we  see  the  foregleams  of  an  approaching  day. 
The  time  is  not  far  distant  when  war  will  glide  into  the 
grim  shadows  of  a  scarce-remembered  past,  when  battles 
will  pass  into  the  oblivion  of  forgotten  horrors.  Then 

1  The  Hague  Conference  of  1907  is  referred  to. 

2  By  the  courtesy  of  President  Roosevelt  the  official  call  for  the  Second 
Hague  Conference  was  issued  by  the  Emperor  of  Russia.  Forty-four  nations 
were  represented.  —  Editor. 


84  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

will  society  realize  its  dreams  of  a  kingdom  of  heaven 
upon  earth,  where  the  barbaric  lure  of  fighting  will  be 
lost ;  where  no  class  lines  may  exist  save  those  freely 
acknowledged  by  a  common  justice ;  where  national 
egoism  maintains  no  armies  for  conquest  and  no  navies 
for  aggrandizement ;  where  economic  resources  are 
devoted,  not  to  mutual  physical  destruction,  but  to 
splendid  spiritual  enlargement;  where  "  every  nation  that 
shall  lift  again  its  hand  against  a  brother,  on  its  forehead 
will  wear  forevermore  the  curse  of  Cain "  ;  and  where, 
in  the  realization  of  a  vast,  racial  brotherhood,  is  fulfilled 
the  prophetic  angel's  song,  "  Peace  on  earth,  good-will 
to  men."  Ruskin,  the  modern  bard  of  peace,  has  sung : 

Put  off,  put  off  your  mail,  ye  kings,  and  beat  your  brands  to  dust  — 
A  surer  grasp  your  hands  must  know,  your  hearts  a  better  trust ; 
Nay,  bend  aback  the  lance's  point,  and  break  the  helmet  bar  — 
A  noise  is  in  the  morning  winds,  but  not  the  noise  of  war ! 
Among  the  grassy  mountain  paths  the  glittering  troops  increase  — 
They  come,  they  come  !  —  how  fair  their  feet,  —  they  come  that 
publish  peace. 


THE  UNITED  STATES  AND  UNIVERSAL 
PEACE 

By  GLENN  PORTER  WISHARD,  Northwestern  University, 
Evanston,  Illinois 

First  Prize  Oration  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  DePauw 
University,  Greencastle,  Indiana,  May  15,  1908 


THE  UNITED  STATES  AND  UNIVERSAL 
PEACE 

Political  and  religious  reforms  move  slowly.  We 
change  our  beliefs  and  at  the  same  time  hold  fast  to  old 
customs.  Farsighted  public  opinion  has  declared  war  to 
be  unchristian ;  sound  statesmanship  has  stamped  it  as 
unjust ;  the  march  of  events  has,  in  a  majority  of  cases, 
proved  it  to  be  unnecessary  —  and  yet  we  continue  to 
build  mammoth  engines  of  destruction  as  if  war  were 
inevitable.  Truly,  the  millennium  is  not  at  hand,  nor  is 
war  a  thing  of  the  past ;  but  whereas  war  was  once  the 
rule,  now  it  is  the  exception.  This  is  an  age  of  peace ; 
controversies  once  decided  by  force  are  now  settled  by 
arbitration.  Europe,  once  the  scene  of  continuous  blood- 
shed, has  not  been  plundered  by  conquering  armies  for 
more  than  a  generation,  while  the  United  States  has  en- 
joyed a  century  of  peace  marred  by  only  five  years  of 
foreign  war.  The  four  notable  conflicts  of  the  last  dec- 
ade have  been  between  great  and  small  powers,  and 
have  been  confined  to  the  outposts  of  civilization ;  while 
during  the  same  period  more  than  one  hundred  disputes 
have  been  settled  by  peaceful  means.  The  willingness  to 
arbitrate  has  been  manifest;  the  means  have  been  pro- 
vided; the  Permanent  International  Court,  established 
by  the  Hague  Conference  in  1899,  actually  lives,  and 
has  already  adjudicated  four  important  controversies.1 

1  From  October  14, 1902,  the  date  of  the  first  decision,  np  to  the  end  of 
1913,  the  Permanent  Court  has  rendered  thirteen  decisions  settling  inter- 
national differences. — Editor. 

37 


38  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

But  arbitration,  yon  say,  will  never  succeed  because  the 
decisions  cannot  be  enforced.  You  forget  that  already 
some  two  hundred  and  fifty  disputes  have  been  settled 
by  this  method,  and  in  not  one  instance  has  the  losing 
power  refused  to  abide  by  the  decision. 

Yesterday  the  man  who  advocated  universal  peace 
was  called  a  dreamer ;  to-day  throughout  the  world 
organized  public  opinion  demands  the  abolition  of  war. 
Yesterday  we  erected  statues  to  those  who  died  for  their 
country ;  to-day  we  eulogize  those  who  live  for  human- 
ity. Yesterday  we  bowed  our  heads  to  the  god  of  war ; 
to-day  we  lift  our  hands  to  the  Prince  of  Peace. 

I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  we  have  entered  the  Uto- 
pian age,  for  the  present  international  situation  is  a  pecu- 
liar one,  since  we  are  at  the  same  time  blessed  with 
peace  and  cursed  with  militarism.  This  is  not  an  age 
of  war,  yet  we  are  burdened  by  great  and  ever-increas- 
ing armaments ;  the  mad  race  for  naval  supremacy  con- 
tinues, while  the  relative  strength  of  the  powers  remains 
practically  the  same ;  the  intense  and  useless  rivalry  of 
the  nations  goes  on  until,  according  to  the  great  Russian 
economist,  Jean  de  Bloch,  it  means  "  slow  destruction 
in  time  of  peace  by  swift  destruction  in  the  event  of 
war."  In  Europe  to-day  millions  are  being  robbed  of 
the  necessaries  of  life,  millions  more  are  suffering  the 
pangs  of  abject  poverty  in  order  to  support  this  so- 
called  "  armed  peace."  Note  the  condition  in  our  own 
country.  Last  year  we  expended  on  our  army,  navy, 
and  pensions  sixty-seven  per  cent  of  our  total  receipts. 
Think  of  it !  In  a  time  of  profound  peace  more  than 
two  thirds  of  our  entire  expenditures  are  charged  to 
the  account  of  war. 


THE  UNITED  STATES  AND  UNIVERSAL  PEACE       39 

We  do  not  advocate  radical,  Utopian  measures  ;  we  do 
not  propose  immediate  disarmament ;  but  we  do  maintain 
that  when  England,  Germany,  France,  and  the  United 
States  each  appropriates  from  thirty  to  forty  per  cent  of 
their  total  expenditures  in  preparation  for  war  in  an 
age  of  peace,  the  time  has  come  for  the  unprejudiced 
consideration  of  the  present  international  situation.  Why 
do  the  great  powers  build  so  many  battleships  ?  President 
Roosevelt,  Representative  Hobson,  and  others  would  have 
us  believe  that  England,  Germany,  and  France  are  actu- 
ally preparing  for  war,  while  the  United  States  is  build- 
ing these  engines  of  destruction  for  the  purpose  of 
securing  peace.  But  what  right  have  we  to  assume  that 
our  navy  is  for  the  purpose  of  preserving  peace,  while  the 
navies  of  the  European  powers  are  for  the  purpose  of 
making  war  ?  Is  not  such  an  assumption  an  insult  to  our 
neighbors  ?  As  a  matter  of  fact,  England  builds  new 
battleships  because  Germany  does,  Germany  increases 
her  navy  because  France  does,  while  the  United  States 
builds  new  dreadnoughts  because  other  nations  pursue 
that  policy.  Call  it  by  whatever  honey-coated  name  you 
will,  the  fact  remains  that  it  is  military  rivalry  of  the 
most  barbarous  type,  a  rivalry  as  useless  as  it  is  oppres- 
sive, a  rivalry  prompted  by  jealousy  and  distrust  where 
there  should  be  friendship  and  mutual  confidence.  There 
is  not  one  of  the  powers  but  that  would  welcome  relief 
from  the  bondage  of  militarism;  the  demand  for  the 
limitation  of  armaments  is  almost  universal.  Believing 
that  to  decry  war  and  praise  peace  without  offering  some 
plan  by  which  the  present  situation  may  be  changed  is 
superficial,  we  hasten  to  propose  something  practicable. 

How,  then,  shall  we  put  an  end  to  this  useless  rivalry 


40  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

of  the  nations  ?  At  present  a  general  agreement  of  the 
great  powers  on  the  limitations  of  military  establish- 
ments seems  impossible.  It  remains  for  some  powerful 
nation  to  prove  to  the  world  that  the  great  armaments 
are  not  necessary  to  continued  peace,  with  honor  and 
justice.  Some  nation  must  take  the  first  step.1  Why 
not  the  United  States  ?  The  nations  of  Europe  are  sur- 
rounded by  powerful  enemies,  while  the  United  States  is 
three  thousand  miles  from  any  conceivable  foe.  They  are 
potentially  weak,  while  our  resources  "are  unlimited. 
They  have  inherited  imperialism ;  we  have  inherited  de- 
mocracy. Their  society  is  permeated  with  militarism ; 
ours  is  built  on  peace  and  liberty.  Our  strategic  posi- 
tion is  unequaled,  our  resources  are  unlimited,  our  for- 
eign policy  is  peaceful,  our  patriotism  is  unconquerable. 
In  view  of  these  facts,  I  ask  you,  What  nation  has  the 
greatest  responsibility  for  peace  ?  Are  not  we  Americans 
the  people  chosen  to  lift  the  burden  of  militarism  from 
off  the  backs  of  our  downtrodden  brothers  ? 

Now  what  are  we  doing  to  meet  this  responsibility? 
On  the  one  hand,  we  are  performing  a  great  work  for 
peace.  Many  of  our  statesmen,  business  men,  and  labor- 
ers, united  in  a  common  cause,  are  exerting  a  tremen- 
dous influence  in  behalf  of  arbitration  and  disarmament. 
On  the  other  hand,  we  are  spending  more  on  our  military 
establishment  than  any  other  world  power ; 2  we  are 
building  more  battleships  than  any  other  nation  ; 3  we  are 

1  The  widely  heralded  proposal  in  1913  for  a  naval  holiday  by  all  the 
great  powers  is  the  first  move  in  this  direction.  — Editor. 

2  The  orator  is  comparing  the  cost  of  the  United  States  army,  navy,  and 
pensions  upkeep  with  the  military  establishments  of  other  powers. — Editor. 

3  Since  naval  rivalry  in  its  acute  form  has  centered  between  Great  Britain 
and  Germany,  European  naval  building  programs  have  exceeded  those  of 
the  United  States.  —  Editor. 


THE  UNITED  STATES  AND  UNIVERSAL  PEACE     41 

no  longer  trusting  our  neighbors  ;  we  are  warning  them  to 
beware  of  our  mailed  fist ;  and  we  are  thereby  declaring 
to  the  world  that  we  have  lost  our  faith  in  the  power  of 
justice  and  are  now  trusting  to  the  force  of  arms. 

And  why  this  paradoxical  situation  ?  Why  do  we  at 
the  same  time  prepare  for  war  and  work  for  peace  ?  It 
is  simply  because  many  of  our  statesmen  honestly  believe 
that  the  best  way  to  preserve  peace  is  to  prepare  for  war. 
It  is  true  that  a  certain  amount  of  strength  tends  to 
command  respect,  and  for  that  reason  a  navy  sufficient 
for  self-defense  is  warranted.  Such  a  navy  we  now  have. 
Why  should  it  be  enlarged  ?  Naval  enthusiasts  would 
have  us  prepare,  not  for  the  probable  but  for  the  pos- 
sible. Seize  every  questionable  act  of  our  neighbors, 
they  say,  magnify  it  a  thousand  times,  publish  it  in  let- 
ters of  flame  throughout  the  land,  and  make  every  Ameri- 
can citizen  believe  that  the  great  powers  are  prepared  to 
destroy  us  at  any  moment.  Having  educated  the  people 
up  to  a  sense  of  threatened  annihilation,  they  burden 
them  with  taxes,  build  artificial  volcanoes  dedicated  to 
peace,  parade  them  up  and  down  the  high  seas,  and  defy 
the  world  to  attack  us.  Then,  they  say,  we  shall  have 
peace.  Is  this  reasonable  ?  As  sure  as  thought  leads  to 
action,  so  preparation  for  war  leads  to  war.  This  argu- 
ment that  the  United  States,  since  she  is  a  peace-loving 
nation,  should  have  the  largest  navy  in  the  world  in 
order  to  preserve  peace  is  illogical  and  without  foun- 
dation. By  what  divine  right  does  the  United  States 
assume  the  role  of  preserving  the  world's  peace  at  the 
cannon's  mouth?  Since  when  has  it  been  true  that 
might  makes  right,  and  that  peace  can  be  secured  only 
by  acting  the  part  of  a  bully?  It  is  unjust,  it  is 


42  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

unpatriotic,  it  is  unstatesmanlike,  for  men  to  argue  that 
the  United  States  should  browbeat  the  world  into  submis- 
sion ;  that  she  should  build  so  many  battleships  that  the 
nations  of  the  Eastern  Hemisphere  will  be  afraid  to 
oppose  the  ironclad  dragon  of  the  Western  Hemisphere. 
Peace  purchased  at  the  price  of  brute  force  is  unworthy 
of  the  name.  Surely  the  United  States  cannot  afford  to 
be  guilty  of  such  an  injustice.  If  we  wish  to  be  free ; 
if  we  wish  to  remain  a  true  republic;  if  we  purpose  to 
continue  our  mighty  work  for  humanity,  we  must  limit 
our  preparations  for  war.  The  best  way  to  preserve  peace 
is  to  think  peace,  to  believe  in  peace,  and  to  work  for 
peace. 

The  extent  to  which  the  great  powers  will  go  in  order 
to  secure  enthusiasm  for  their  military  establishments  is 
almost  beyond  comprehension.  Each  nation  has  its  great 
military  rendezvous,  its  grand  naval  parades,  its  mag- 
nificent display  of  gorgeous  military  uniforms,  its  wave 
of  colors,  blare  of  trumpets,  and  bursts  of  martial  music. 
The  United  States  is  now  sending  her  navy  around  the 
world  —  for  the  purpose  of  training  the  seamen  ?  —  cer- 
tainly, but  also  that  the  youth  of  our  land  may  be  intoxi- 
cated by  the  apparent  glory  of  it  all,  and  thus  enlist  for 
service ;  that  the  American  citizens  may  be  aroused  to 
greater  enthusiasm  by  this  magnificent  display  of  the 
implements  of  legalized  murder,  and  thus  be  willing  to 
build  more  floating  arsenals  rather  than  irrigate  arid  lands, 
develop  internal  waterways,  build  hospitals,  schools,  and 
colleges. 

The  trouble  with  such  exhibitions  is,  that  it  displays 
only  the  bright  side  of  militarism.  If  in  place  of  the  Rus- 
sian battleships  they  should  display  the  starving  masses 


THE  UNITED  STATES  AND  UNIVERSAL  PEACE     43 

of  dejected  and  despised  beings  who  pay  for  those  battle- 
ships ;  if  in  place  of  the  gay  German  uniforms  they 
should  exhibit  the  rags  of  the  disheartened  peasants  who 
pay  for  those  uniforms ;  if  in  place  of  the  grand  parade 
they  should  produce  masses  of  wounded  men  and  rivers 
of  blood ;  if  in  place  of  the  stirring  martial  music  they 
should  produce  the  writhing  agonies  and  awful  groans 
of  dying  men ;  if  in  place  of  sham  war  they  should 
produce  actual  war,  —  their  exhibitions  would  make 
militarism  unbearable. 

Again,  we  are  told  that  we  have  suddenly  become  a 
world  power,  and  that  we  must  prepare  to  exercise  a  new 
diplomacy  under  new  conditions.  We  must  increase  our 
navy,  they  say,  to  enforce  this  new  diplomacy.  We  must 
prepare  to  fight  in  behalf  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine.  But 
why,  I  ask,  cannot  this  new  diplomacy  be  enforced  as 
American  diplomacy  has  always  been  enforced?  We 
promulgated  the  Monroe  Doctrine  without  a  navy ;  we 
have  maintained  it  for  over  eighty  years  without  the 
show  of  force.  If  our  new  diplomacy  is  right,  it  is  as 
strong  as  the  world's  respect  for  righteousness ;  if  it  is 
wrong,  a  hundred  battleships  cannot  enforce  it. 

We  have  become  a  world  power,  and  therefore  we  have 
a  world-wide  responsibility,  and  that  responsibility  is  to 
establish  justice,  not  force ;  to  build  colleges,  not  battle- 
ships ;  to  enthrone  love,  not  hate ;  to  insure  peace,  not 
war.  Our  mission  is  to  strike  the  chains  from  the  ankles 
of  war-burdened  humanity.  Our  duty  is  to  proclaim  in 
the  name  of  the  Most  High  our  faith  in  the  power  of 
justice  as  opposed  to  the  force  of  arms.  May  it  be  said 
of  us  that  we  found  the  world  burdened  with  militarism, 
but  left  it  blessed  with  peace ;  that  we  found  liberty 


44  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

among  the  strong  alone,  but  left  it  the  birthright  of  the 
weak ;  that  we  found  humanity  a  mass  of  struggling 
individuals,  but  left  it  a  united  brotherhood.  May  it  be 
said  of  us  that  we  found  peace  purchased  by  suffering, 
but  left  it  as  free  as  air ;  that  we  found  peace  bruised 
and  stained  with  militarism,  but  left  it  ruling  the  world 
through  love  and  liberty.  May  it  be  said  of  us  that  we 
fulfilled  our  mission  as  a  world  power ;  that  we  were 
brave  enough  and  strong  enough  to  lead  the  world  into 
the  path  of  universal  peace. 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  WORLD  PEACE 

By  LEVI  T.  PENNINGTON,  Earlham  College,  Eichmond, 
Indiana 

First  Prize  Oration  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  The  University 
of  Chicago,  May  4,  1909 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  WORLD  PEACE 

In  the  progress  of  the  world  the  dream  of  yesterday 
becomes  the  confident  hope  of  to-day  and  the  realized 
fact  of  to-morrow.  As  old  systems  fail  to  meet  new  con- 
ditions and  new  ideals,  they  are  discarded ;  and  into  the 
limbo  of  worse  than  useless  things  is  passing  the  system 
of  human  sacrifice  to  the  Moloch  of  international  war- 
fare. For  centuries  world  peace  has  been  the  dream 
of  the  poet,  the  philanthropist,  the  statesman,  and  the 
Christian.  That  dream  is  becoming  a  confident  hope. 
This  generation  should  see  it  an  accomplished  fact. 

There  was  a  time  when  individual  prowess  determined 
the  issue  of  every  difference.  Might  made  right,  so  it 
was  thought,  and  the  winner  in  any  controversy  was  he 
who  had  the  heaviest  club,  the  strongest  arm,  or  the 
thickest  skull.  Man's  interrelationships  multiplied  as 
humanity  advanced ;  with  each  new  relation  came  new 
causes  for  quarrel,  and  for  a  time  advancing  civilization 
brought  but  increase  in  murders  and  assassinations. 

We  know  the  process  by  which  personal  combat  ceased ; 
how  the  duel  replaced  murder  and  ambush  and  assas- 
sination; how  courts  of  law  replaced  the  duel.  The 
dreamer  saw  the  day  when  personal  combat  should  be 
no  more ;  the  man  of  mind  refuted  all  the  arguments  in 
favor  of  the  duel  of  men ;  the  constructive  statesman  of 
that  early  day  instituted  courts  of  law  and  equity.  Men 
who  had  a  difference  insisted  that  it  was  their  quarrel 

47 


48  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

and  they  alone  could  settle  it ;  but  reason  saw  that  two 
combatants  inflamed  by  passion  are  least  fitted  of  all 
men  to  see  where  justice  lies.  Many  held  that  where 
honor  is  involved,  no  one  can  adjust  the  difficulty  but 
those  most  directly  concerned ;  but  reason  saw  that  a 
man's  honor  cannot  be  vindicated  by  killing  his  enemy 
or  being  killed  by  him.  Men  said,  "  If  personal  combat 
is  abolished,  courage  and  strength  will  perish  from  the 
earth."  But  reason  saw  that  personal  combat  in  a  selfish 
cause  does  not  bring  out  the  highest  type  of  courage ; 
and  that  there  are  opportunities  enough  for  the  exercise 
of  the  highest  and  best  moral  and  physical  courage  to 
keep  valor  alive  forever.  It  was  finally  urged  that  there 
would  be  no  power  to  enforce  the  decree  if  personal 
differences  were  left  to  the  adjudication  of  others  ;  but 
reason  said,  "That  power  will  come  with  the  need  for  it." 
And  so  courts  of  law  and  equity  arose,  based  on  the  need 
of  humanity  ;  laws  were  passed  defining  rights  and  limit- 
ing aggression ;  and  when  one  man  wronged  another,  that 
wrong  was  settled  in  court  by  the  power  of  the  whole 
people  and  not  in  personal  combat  with  the  bludgeon  or 
the  knife. 

For  similar  reasons  wars  between  states  and  tribes 
have  ceased ;  and  face  to  face  with  the  inevitable  logic 
of  past  progress  stands  the  world  to-day.  Though  hu- 
manity has  been  slow  to  see  it,  the  truth  has  begun  to 
dawn  in  the  hearts  of  men  —  that  international  wars  are 
no  more  to  be  justified  than  civil  strife,  tribal  warfare, 
or  personal  combat.  Gradually  the  omnipotent  power 
of  right  is  overcoming  the  inertia  of  humanity,  and  the 
world  is  moving.  One  by  one  the  awful  truths  concern- 
ing war  are  forcing  themselves  upon  the  consciousness 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  WORLD  PEACE  49 

and  the  conscience  of  men.  The  mighty  power  of  fact  is 
beating  clown  the  opposition  to  world  peace. 

Men  have  begun  to  realize  the  terrible  cost,  the  un- 
believable wastefulness  of  actual  war,  and  the  preparation 
for  possible  war.  When  we  read  that  the  armed  peace 
of  Europe  the  past  thirty-seven  years  has  cost  $111,000,- 
000,000,  nearly  as  much  as  the  aggregate  value  of  all 
the  resources  of  the  United  Slates,  the  richest  nation  on 
earth,  the  figures  are  so  appalling  that  mortal  mind  can- 
not conceive  them,  and  they  lose  their  force.  When  we 
remember  that  two  thirds  of  the  national  revenues  of 
the  United  States  are  spent  on  wars  past  or  prospec- 
tive, the  matter  comes  closer  home.  When  we  realize 
that  the  cost  of  a  single  battleship  exceeds  the  value  of 
all  the  grounds  and  buildings  of  all  the  colleges  and  uni- 
versities in  Illinois,  the  figures  have  more  meaning  to  us. 
And  when  we  reflect  that  the  cost  of  a  single  shot  from 
one  of  the  great  guns  of  that  battleship  would  build  a 
home  for  an  American  family,  a  comfortable  home  costing 
$1700,  the  common  man  realizes  that  the  richest  nation 
on  earth  cannot  afford  to  go  to  war  nor  prepare  for  war. 

But  mere  money  is  one  of  the  cheapest  things  in  all 
the  world.  The  price  of  war  never  can  be  paid  in  gold. 
Not  in  national  treasuries  can  you  see  the  payment  of 
that  price,  where  smug,  well-groomed  politicians  sign 
bonds  and  bills  of  credit.  If  you  would  see  the  payment 
of  that  price  of  war,  you  must  go  to  the  place  of  war. 
With  all  your  senses  open,  step  upon  the  battlefield. 
Smell  the  smoke  of  burning  powder,  the  reek  of  charging 
horses,  the  breath  of  fresh,  red,  human  blood.  Feel  the 
warmth  of  that  blood  as  you  seek  to  stanch  the  wound 
in  the  breast  of  one  of  the  world's  bravest,  dying  for  he 


50  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

knows  not  what.  Hear  the  screams  of  the  shells,  the 
booming  roar  of  the  cannonade,  the  clash  of  the  on- 
slaught, the  shrieks  of  the  wounded,  the  groans  of  the 
dying,  the  last  gasp  of  him  whose  life  has  reached  its 
end.  Such  is  the  infernal  music  of  war.  See  the  victim 
of  the  conflict  reel  in  the  saddle  and  fall  headlong.  Cast 
your  eyes  on  the  mangled  forms  of  godlike  men,  fallen 
in  the  midst  of  fullest  life.  Come  in  the  night  after  the 
battle  and  look  upon  the  ghastly  faces  upturned  in  the 
moonlight.  Gaze  on  the  windrows  of  the  dead,  Mars's 
awful  harvest,  that  impoverishes  all  and  enriches  none, 
and  you  know  something  of  the  cost  of  war. 

And  yet  we  have  seen  but  little.  Could  we  but  enter 
the  wasted  homes  and  see  the  broken  hearts  that  war 
has  made ;  could  we  go  to  the  almshouses  and  soldiers' 
orphans'  homes  and  see  widows  and  children  by  the 
thousand  suffering  the  doled-out  charity  of  state  or  na- 
tion because  war  has  robbed  them  of  their  rightful  pro- 
tectors ;  could  we  but  realize  the  agony  of  the  broken 
home,  a  thousandfold  worse  than  the  agony  of  the  battle- 
field, —  then  might  we  know  more  of  the  real  cost  of  war. 

And  still  our  idea  would  be  inadequate,  though  we 
realized  the  full  measure  of  every  groan  and  heartache. 
Earth's  most  priceless  treasures  are  still  more  intangible 
things,  the  treasures  of  justice  and  kindliness  and  love. 
In  that  higher  realm  the  cost  of  war  is  most  terrible  and 
most  deadly.  The  spirit  of  war  in  the  soldier  sets  aside 
the  moral  law,  makes  human  life  seem  valueless,  human 
suffering  a  thing  to  be  disregarded,  human  slaughter  an 
honorable  profession.  The  war  spirit  blinds  the  eye  of 
the  statesman,  till  wrong  seems  right,  folly  seems  ex- 
pediency, and  the  death  of  thousands  seems  preferable 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  WORLD  PEACE  51 

to  the  life  and  happiness  of  all  under  terms  of  peace 
not  dictated  by  his  own  will.  Justice  is  dethroned,  and 
revenge  takes  up  the  iron  scepter  and  lets  fly  the  thun- 
derbolt. The  war  spirit  perverts  the  mind  of  the  pub- 
licist, till  the  achievements  of  honorable  peace  sink  into 
insignificance,  and  the  press  clamors  for  the  war  that 
means  money  to  the  publisher  but  death  to  innocent 
thousands  who  can  have  no  possible  interest  in  the  con- 
flict. The  war  spirit  takes  possession  of  the  pulpit,  and 
the  minister  called  to  preach  the  loving  message  of  the 
Prince  of  Peace  stirs  up  the  spirit  of  contention  and 
animosity,  of  hate  and  murder.  Could  we  but  draw 
aside  the  curtain  and,  back  of  the  tinsel  and  gold  braid, 
see  the  crime,  the  hate,  the  moral  degradation  that  war 
always  brings,  never  again  would  a  friend  of  humanity 
ask  for  war. 

But  the  eyes  of  the  world  are  opening  to  the  fact  that 
the  cost  of  war  is  far  too  high  in  money  and  in  men,  in 
suffering  and  sacrifice,  and  in  those  higher  values  of  jus- 
tice and  kindliness  and  love.  And  as  the  thought  once 
grew  that  personal  differences  might  be  settled  without 
personal  combat,  so  men  are  looking  toward  the  settle- 
ment of  international  difficulties  without  recourse  to  the 
sword.  They  have  seen  that  every  argument  against 
the  duel  of  men  applies  with  still  greater  force  against 
the  duel  of  nations.  And  the  world  has  moved  farther 
toward  world  peace  in  the  past  twenty-five  years  than 
in  all  the  centuries  of  history  that  have  preceded.  World 
peace  has  become  not  the  dream  of  the  poet  but  the 
confident  hope  of  the  world,  whose  realization  is  the 
task  whose  accomplishment  is  set  for  the  men  of  this 
generation. 


52  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

One  by  one  the  obstacles  to  world  peace  are  being 
broken  down.  Commerce  has  destroyed  much  of  inter- 
national prejudice.  Community  of  interest  has  obviated 
many  former  causes  of  quarrel.  The  sophistical  argu- 
ments of  the  friends  of  war  are  being  answered  by  the 
logic  of  hard  facts.  Warfare  has  been  ameliorated  by 
international  agreement.  Vast  reaches  of  territory  have 
been  neutralized.  Unfortified  cities  are  no  longer  to  be 
bombarded  in  any  country.  Actual  disarmament  has 
taken  place  between  the  United  States  and  Canada,  be- 
tween Chile  and  Argentina.1  Norway  and  Sweden  have 
separated  peaceably.  Bulgaria  has  achieved  her  independ- 
ence without  bloodshed.  The  Dogger  Bank  incident, 
which  a  century  earlier  would  have  plunged  England 
and  Russia  into  war,  has  been  adjusted  amicably.  Two 
Hague  Conferences  have  advanced  tremendously  the 
progress  of  international  amity.  Over  eighty  arbitration 
treaties  are  now  in  force.  We  already  have  a  perma- 
nent high  court  of  nations,  to  which  are  being  referred 
questions  that  would  once  have  resulted  in  war.  And  we 
are  nearer  than  the  dreamer  of  last  century  dared  hope  to 
"the  Parliament  of  man,  the  Federation  of  the  world." 

1The  famous  "disarmament"  between  the  Argentine  Republic  and 
Chile  was  brought  about  by  a  series  of  four  documents  of  May  28,  1902, 
one  of  July  10,  1902,  and  one  of  January  9, 1903.  A  preliminary  protocol 
declares  the  disposition  of  both  countries  "  to  remove  all  causes  for  trouble 
in  their  international  relations."  A  general  treaty  of  arbitration  unlimited 
in  scope  was  signed  for  a  period  of  ten  years.  A  convention  bound  each 
country  to  "desist  from  acquiring  the  vessels  of  war  now  building  for 
them,  and  from  henceforth  making  new  acquisitions."  Article  II  says  that 
"  the  two  governments  bind  themselves  not  to  increase  their  naval  arma- 
ments during  a  period  of  five  years,  without  previous  notice."  As  a  result 
of  arbitration  resulting  from  this  series  of  agreements  the  frontier  was  dis- 
armed and  remains  free  from  military  posts.  New  naval  programs  of 
both  countries  were  formulated  after  the  expiration  of  the  period  of  ab- 
negation, and  dreadnoughts  are  now  in  course  of  construction.  —  Editor. 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  WORLD  PEACE  53 

But  not  yet  has  the  millennium  dawned.  In  the  face 
of  all  this  progress,  armies  and  navies  are  stronger  and 
more  burdensome  than  ever.  The  United  States  spends 
more  on  wars  past  and  prospective  than  for  all  educa- 
tional purposes,  and  England,  France,  Germany,  Russia, 
groan  under  the  burdens  of  the  armed  peace  of  Europe. 
Armed  to  the  teeth,  the  nations  of  the  world  lie  watching 
one  another.  The  mind  of  the  world  is  convinced  that 
war  is  futile  and  terribly  wasteful.  The  heart  of  the 
world  is  convinced  that  war  is  cruel  and  inexcusable. 
The  conscience  of  the  world  has  admitted  that  war  is 
wrong  and  morally  unjustifiable.  And  still  the  prepara- 
tion for  war  goes  on,  and  unless  conditions  are  changed, 
war  is  inevitable.  What  is  to  be  done  ?  The  world's  will 
must  be  moved,  and  men  must  be  led  to  do  what  they 
have  already  admitted  is  right  and  just  and  expedient. 

As  we  have  led  in  other  days,  so  must  America  lead 
to-day.  As  the  light  of  republican  government  and  com- 
plete justice  to  the  individual  first  saw  full  dawn  in  the 
United  States,  so  the  eyes  of  the  world  are  turned  toward 
us  to  see  the  dawn  of  world  peace,  and  full  justice  to 
all  the  nations.  It  is  ours  to  lead.  The  example  of  the 
United  States  will  do  more  than  a  century  of  argument 
and  conference.  America  should  begin  the  disarmament 
that  will  eventually  mean  the  triumph  of  world  peace. 

We  have  naught  to  fear.  We  are  far  distant  from  the 
storm  centers  of  the  world.  We  have  no  foes  within  that 
demand  a  large  standing  army,  and  there  are  no  enemies 
without  that  are  anxious  to  try  conclusions  with  us  on 
land  or  sea.  Then  away  with  war  talk  and  war  scares 
and  "jingoism."  In  time  of  peace  let  us  prepare  for 
peace,  that  all  the  world  may  enjoy  peace.  American 


54  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

disarmament  will  be  a  tremendous  stride  toward  the  ac- 
complishment of  the  world's  desire  —  the  cessation  of 
international  warfare ;  a  great  world's  court,  to  settle  all 
international  differences ;  an  international  police  force, 
to  give  effect  to  the  decrees  of  this  court ;  and  the  end 
of  the  burdens  of  armies  and  navies  under  which  the 
whole  world  is  groaning.  Let  heart  and  voice  and  pen, 
pulpit  and  press  and  platform,  soldier  and  statesmen  and 
private  citizen,  ask  for  peace,  and  not  for  war. 

This  is  a  part  of  the  world's  larger  hope.  Pessimists 
there  are  who  say  that  human  nature  is  belligerent,  and 
that  war  will  never  be  abolished.  But  international  war- 
fare has  already  seen  the  handwriting  on  the  wall.  Mars 
has  been  weighed  in  the  balances  and  found  wanting. 
The  fruitless  slaughter  of  the  millions  is  not  to  be  for- 
ever nor  for  long.  Let  us  hasten  the  day  when  the  roll- 
ing war  drum  will  be  hushed  forever,  the  bugle  note  no 
longer  call  to  carnage ;  when  Cf  nation  shall  not  lift  up 
sword  against  nation,  neither  shall  they  learn  war  any 
more."  Love  shall  take  the  place  of  Hate,  and  Justice  sit 
on  the  throne  instead  of  Greed.  Some  day  in  the  not 
distant  future  the  nations  that  have  all  these  centuries 
bowed  before  the  god  of  war  shall  own  eternal  allegiance 
to  the  Prince  of  Peace.  And  "of  the  increase  of  His 
government  and  of  Peace  there  shall  be  no  end." 


THE  WASTE  OF  WAR  — THE  WEALTH 
OF  PEACE 

By  ARTHUR  FORAKER  YOUNG,  Western  Eeserve  University, 
Cleveland,  Ohio 

First  Prize  Oration  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  the  University 
of  Michigan,  May  13,  1910 


THE  WASTE  OF  WAR --THE  WEALTH 
OF  PEACE 

In  the  worship  of  Mars,  Herodotus  tells  us,  the  ancient 
Scythian  erected  an  old  scimitar  at  the  summit  of  a  huge 
brush  heap.  To  this,  as  a  symbol  of  the  great  god  of 
war,  he  offered  not  only  the  produce  of  the  land  but  also 
human  life  in  sacrifice.  We  shudder  as  we  picture  the 
priest  standing  over  his  victim,  his  hands  wet  with  the 
blood  of  his  fellow  man.  We  cry  out  in  horror  as  we 
think  of  the  lives  these  peoples  sacrificed.  We  call  it 
an  inhuman  glorification  of  a  pagan  deity.  We  call  it  a 
ruthless  waste  of  wealth  and  human  life.  These  prac- 
tices we  pronounce  to  be  the  result  of  a  popular  delu- 
sion —  a  false  sense  of  obligation  to  the  spirit  of  war. 
Yet  from  the  time  the  Scythian  drew  the  blood  of  his 
victim  in  homage  to  the  great  war  god,  even  down  to 
our  own  day,  the  nations  have  paid  homage  to  Mars. 

Though  we  boast  of  our  progress  in  civilization,  his- 
tory reveals  the  fact  that  we,  too,  have  been  the  victims 
of  the  Scythian's  delusion.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  one  of 
the  most  terrible  customs  of  savage  men  counts  among 
its  followers  to-day  all  the  nations  of  the  earth?  The 
subtlest  skill  of  the  scientist,  the  keenest  intelligence  of 
the  statesman,  vast  stores  of  the  world's  resources,  are 
devoted  to  maintaining  great  armies  and  navies,  to  in- 
venting new  means  of  attack  or  defense,  to  enlarging 
and  making  more  deadly  the  enginery  of  war.  What  is 

57 


58  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

our  boast  of  civilization,  while  we  tolerate  this  devotion 
of  so  many  men  and  so  much  of  wealth  to  war  ?  Is  this 
not  a  sacrifice  essentially  pagan  in  spirit  ?  Are  we  not 
still  paying  unrighteous  homage  to  Mars  ? 

Why,  then,  we  ask,  do  nations  make  provision  for  war 
the  first  necessity  of  national  life  ?  Behold  Russia.  A 
few  years  ago,  in  time  of  famine,  spending  millions  of 
money  for  war  equipment  when  millions  of  her  own  peas- 
antry were  slowly  starving  for  the  lack  of  one  dollar's 
worth  of  food  per  month.  What  motive  impelled  Russia 
to  this  heathen  conduct  ?  It  was  solely  that  Germany, 
France,  England,  Japan,  and  the  United  States  had  great 
armies  and  navies  against  which  starving  Russia  must 
be  prepared  to  defend  herself.  What  dire  stress  compels 
England  to-day  to  perpetuate  her  program  of  naval  su- 
premacy when  she  is  struggling  in  the  throes  of  budget 
difficulties  which  seem  all  but  unsolvable  ?  What  is  it 
that  compels  Germany  and  France  to  tax  themselves 
until  they  fairly  stagger  under  the  burden  of  military 
expenditures  ?  Naught  other  than  a  suicidal  lust  for 
military  power.  Naught  other  than  the  infatuation  of 
the  dizzy,  competitive  war  dance  of  mutual  destruction— 
each  nation  blindly  driven  by  all,  and  all  by  each. 

We  as  Americans  profess  to  find  in  the  conduct  of 
Russia,  in  the  militarism  of  England  and  Germany  and 
France,  examples  of  militarism  run  rampant.  How  our 
hearts  have  warmed  within  us  when  we  have  thought  of 
our  own  republic  as  the  happy  envied  nation,  free  from 
the  burden  of  militarism !  Our  farmer  has  gone  singing 
about  his  work,  apparently  not  having  to  carry  on  his  back 
a  soldier,  as  does  the  European  peasant.  Our  mechanic 
has  freely  plied  his  trade  without  thought  of  supporting 


WASTE  OF  WAR  — WEALTH  OF  PEACE     59 

a  sailor.  Yet  how  can  we  say  that  the  United  States  in 
buying  battleships  and  erecting  coast  defenses,  in  arm- 
ing her  soldiers  with  Krag-Jorgensens,  has  not  been  de- 
prived of  schools,  colleges,  and  opportunities  essential  to 
happiness  and  prosperity?  In  a  decade  we  have  spent 
nearly  a  billion  dollars  on  our  navy  alone.  Yes,  we  have 
aped  the  military  fashions  of  Europe  and  have  set  a  new 
standard  of  military  waste. 

Verily  our  national  advancement  waits  on  militarism. 
Inland  waterways  should  be  improved ;  forests  must  be 
safeguarded ;  other  natural  resources  of  untold  value 
should  be  conserved ;  millions  of  acres  of  desert  lands 
should  be  improved ;  millions  in  swamps  should  be  re- 
deemed. The  problem  of  the  nation's  food  supply  is  be- 
coming urgent ;  for  its  solution  we  must  look  more  and 
more  to  scientific  methods  in  agriculture.  Yet  contrast 
the  support  our  government  gives  these  vital  interests 
with  war's  mighty  drain  on  our  treasury.  Congress  ap- 
propriated $648,000,000  for  all  expenditures  in  1910. 
Of  this  amount  $407,000,000  were  appropriated  for  war 
expenditures  and  the  glories  of  militarism.  For  this 
same  year  agriculture  received  for  all  its  needs  the  com- 
paratively paltry  sum  of  $12,000,000.  In  spite  of  the  fact 
that  our  nation  is  devoting  two  thirds  of  its  enormous 
national  expenditures  to  war,  our  militarists  point  to  our 
vast  national  wealth  and  sneer  at  the  niggardly  mortals 
who  object  to  spending  it  for  guns. 

It  is  evident  that  no  nation  is  yet  beyond  the  infatua- 
tion for  display  of  the  splendors  of  war,  yet  in  every  one 
there  are  signs  of  a  new  power  that  is  coming  upon  us. 
All  are  thinking  less  of  the  glories  of  war  —  of  the 
beat  of  the  drum,  of  the  rhythmic  tread  of  regiments,  of 


60  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

glittering  sabers  and  of  monster  battleships  —  and  are 
thinking  more  and  more  of  the  glories  of  peace,  of  thriving 
industries,  of  magnificent  libraries,  of  comfortable  homes, 
and  of  more  efficient  schools.  Obviously,  though  we  still 
possess  a  war  spirit,  we  are  seeing  with  a  clearer  vision 
that  the  waste  of  war  is  depriving  us  of  the  fullest  meas- 
ure of  the  wealth  of  peace.  Our  frame  of  mind  is  much 
the  same  as  that  of  the  ragged  street  urchin  who,  having 
lost  his  day's  earnings,  thinks  of  a  hundred  things  which 
he  might  have  spent  it  for.  The  same  spirit  is  permeat- 
ing every  nation.  The  American  manufacturer,  the  Rus- 
sian peasant,  the  English  mechanic,  the  German  scientist, 
the  French  scholar,  are  all  asking  themselves,  "  Why 
need  the  world  continue  to  carry  this  Atlantean  burden 
of  war  ?  " 

Already  this  sentiment  has  accomplished  practically 
all  that  can  be  done  in  humanizing  war.  It  has  outlawed 
the  dumdum  bullet,  it  has  enforced  radical  sanitary 
measures,  it  has  neutralized  the  Red  Cross  and  brought 
its  ministrations  to  the  relief  of  the  sufferings  of  war. 
But  humanized  war  is  not  the  goal  of  this  sentiment.  As 
long  as  there  is  an  increase  of  armaments  there  will  be 
war ;  as  long  as  the  battle  rages  there  will  be  waste  and 
suffering.  The  same  sentiment  which  has  humanized  war 
now  demands  war's  abolition.  It  has  already  accom- 
plished something  toward  this  end  in  making  the  settle- 
ment of  international  disputes  through  arbitration  more 
probable  than  war.  What  it  has  not  accomplished  is  the 
discrediting  of  militarism.  It  has  failed  to  stop  the 
growth  of  armaments.  Can  we  expect  our  regiments  to 
find  contentment  in  the  irksome  routine  of  training  camp 
with  never  a  thought  of  charging  the  enemy  ?  Can  we 


WASTE  OF  WAR  — WEALTH  OF  PEACE  61 

expect  to  man  the  seas  with  fleets  of  war  just  for  gay 
parade  and  cruises  around  the  world  ?  Can  we  expect 
that  our  skilled  gunners  will  be  satisfied  to  practice,  prac- 
tice always,  and  never  long  for  human  targets  ?  It  is 
against  arming  nations  for  battle  and  tempting  them  to 
fight  that  the  peace  sentiment  is  rousing  itself  and  is  be- 
ing organized.  It  is  in  this  labor  that  peace  societies  the 
world  over  are  performing  valiant  service.  Their  great 
mission  is  the  creation  of  an  intelligent  public  opinion, 
a  force  more  potent  than  government  itself. 

What,  for  instance,  was  the  purpose  of  the  founder  of 
this  Intercollegiate  Peace  Association  ?  Not,  I  take  it, 
to  give  men  a  chance  to  win  petty  oratorical  triumphs ; 
not,  I  suppose,  to  bring  together  speakers  to  entertain 
such  audiences  as  this  —  or  to  weary  them.  But  their 
object  must  have  been  to  set  the  men  of  our  colleges  to 
thinking  on  the  great  question  of  peace.  In  such  ways 
are  peace  societies  using  the  platform  and  the  press  to 
establish  a  firm  basis  for  unity  and  peace  throughout 
the  world. 

Yesterday  the  advocate  of  world  peace  was  called  a 
dreamer;  to-day  rapidly  organizing  public  opinion  de- 
mands the  abolition  of  war  and  recognizes  the  wealth 
and  culture  of  peace.  Yesterday  we  erected  statues  to 
those  who  died  for  their  country ;  to-day  we  cheer  the 
Gladstones,  the  McKinleys,  the  Roosevelts,  who  live  for 
humanity.  Yesterday  we  bowed  the  knee  to  Mars ;  to- 
day we  join  in  peans  to  the  Prince  of  Peace.  Yes,  the 
new  spirit  of  the  day  is  fraternal ;  it  is  undaunted ;  it  is 
for  mankind.  Even  now  the  world's  geniuses  are  mus- 
tering the  soldier  citizens  of  every  nation  for  a  peaceful 
conflict.  The  great  battles  of  to-morrow  are  to  be  fought 


62  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

in  quiet  laboratories,  in  legislative  halls,  in  courts  of  jus- 
tice, and  on  the  broad  battlefields  of  productive  labor. 

The  final  outcome  is,  indeed,  irresistible.  Racial  move- 
ments have  mixed  all  peoples;  the  oceans  have  become 
the  world's  common  highways  ;  the  air  is  filled  with  voices 
speaking  from  city  to  city  and  from  continent  to  conti- 
nent ;  an  international  postal  system  makes  the  world's 
ideas  one;  there  is  quick  participation  of  mankind  in  the 
fruits  of  invention  and  research.  We  behold  financial 
and  economic  enterprises  world-wide  in  their  outreach ; 
we  feel  the  force  of  social  projects  and  social  ideals  that 
concern  not  one  but  every  nation ;  and  we  are  participat- 
ing in  missionary  movements  that  affect  not  one  but 
every  race,  and  are  changing  the  very  face  of  nature  itself. 
Our  world  is  a  world  unified  beyond  all  possible  con- 
ception a  century  ago,  and  the  world  unity  is  a  certain 
stepping  stone  to  world  peace. 

The  world  never  offered  grander  opportunity  to  the 
nations  for  leadership  —  not  for  leadership  in  military 
splendor,  but  for  leadership  in  the  sublime  paths  of  peace. 
For  the  United  States  this  call  means  not  only  oppor- 
tunity but  even  obligation.  Already  this  country  has 
performed  well  her  duty  in  fostering  international  arbi- 
tration. She  has  been  a  party  to  half  of  the  cases  where 
disputes  between  nations  have  been  referred  to  the  Hague 
Tribunal.  Arbitration  is  performing  its  mission  with  more 
and  more  efficiency,  yet  each  year  the  war  budgets  of  the 
nations  are  increasing.  The  peace  sentiment  now  de- 
mands a  decrease  of  armaments,  a  conversion  of  the  waste 
of  war  into  the  wealth  of  peace.  To  demonstrate  that  this 
is  practicable  is  the  immediate  opportunity  before  us,  our 
present  obligation.  What  is  our  waste  of  war  expressed 


WASTE  OF  WAR— WEALTH  OF  PEACE          63 

in  terms  of  the  wealth  of  peace  ?  Notice  !  Two  thirds  of 
the  cost  of  one  dreadnought,  like  the  mammoth  Florida 
launched  but  yesterday,  would  erect  and  furnish  a  veri- 
table palace  for  every  foreign  ambassador  and  minister  of 
the  United  States,  thus  solving  a  perplexing  problem  of 
our  diplomatic  service.  One  twenty-second  of  the  cost 
of  one  dreadnought  would  support  for  one  year  the  entire 
force  of  the  American  Board  of  Foreign  Missions  in  their 
work  of  proclaiming  our  gospel  of  peace.-  One  half  the 
cost  of  one  dreadnought  would  erect  and  equip  twenty- 
five  manual-training  schools,  teaching  the  rudiments  of 
a  trade  to  forty  thousand  young  people  each  year.  The 
cost  of  two  dreadnoughts  would  provide  every  state  in 
the  Union  with  a  half -million  dollars  with  which  to  save 
the  juvenile  delinquents  from  criminal  courts  and  schools 
of  vice  behind  prison  bars.  The  cost  of  one  dreadnought, 
wisely  spent  each  year  in  the  fight  against  tuberculosis, 
would  make  the  white  plague  in  a  single  generation  a 
disease  as  rare  as  smallpox  is  to-day. 

Where  now  we  are  erecting  battleships  and  forts,  it  is 
for  us  to  build  libraries  and  schools.  Where  now  we 
drain  our  treasuries  in  equipping  men  to  fight  their  fel- 
low men,  it  is  for  us  to  arm  against  the  common  enemy, 
disease.  Where  now  we  pour  out  our  wealth  before  the 
pagan  Mars,  it  is  for  us  to  devote  our  treasure  to  sup- 
porting the  works  of  the  Prince  of  Peace. 

Such  a  victory  for  peace  would  make  America  not 
simply  a  world  power:  it  would  make  her  the  world 
leader.  Will  we  stop  tagging  at  the  heels  of  Great  Britain 
and  Germany  and  travel  this  broadening  road  in  which 
we  can  be  first  ?  How  humiliating  to  struggle  along,  a 
trailer  in  the  military  procession !  How  noble  to  set  the 


64  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

daring  example  of  living  up  to  the  belief  in  peace ! 
Will  we  say :  "  See  our  hands ;  we  bear  no  bludgeons. 
Search  us ;  we  carry  no  concealed  weapons.  Militarism 
we  have  thrown  to  the  scrap  heap  of  practices  discredited 
and  vicious.  We  have  stopped  war's  wanton  waste  of 
men  and  treasure ;  we  rejoice  in  the  growing  wealth  of 
peace  ideals  realized  "  ?  Thus  shall  we  speed  the  steadily 
growing  public  opinion  of  the  world,  to  the  bar  of  which 
must  finally  come  every  nation  which  does  aught  to  break 
or  hinder  the  world's  peace. 


THE  HOPE  OF  PEACE 

By  STANLEY  H.  HOWE,  Albion  College,  Albion,  Michigan 

First  Prize  Oration  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  Johns  Hopkins 
University,  May  5,  1911 


THE  HOPE  OF  PEACE 

The  history  of  civilization  is  a  record  of  changing 
ideals,  and  ideals  are  best  reared  in  the  hearts  of  the 
world's  young  men.  Inevitably,  nations  look  toward  the 
cradle  for  their  future  and  intrust  the  care  of  their  des- 
tiny to  the  hands  of  youth.  "  Tell  me  what  are  the  pre- 
vailing sentiments  that  occupy  the  minds  of  your  young 
men,"  declared  Edmund  Burke,  "  and  I  will  tell  you  what 
is  to  be  the  character  of  the  next  generation."  When  the 
blood  of  youth  is  sluggish  and  impure  ;  when  the  young 
hold  wealth  more  dear  than  worth,  remove  the  check  of 
virtue  from  their  selfish  aims,  establish  Mammon  as  their 
god,  and,  ambitious  to  govern  the  world,  forget  how  to 
govern  themselves,  —  then  nations  choke  and  die.  But 
when  the  blood  of  youth  is  rich  and  pure,  pulsating 
through  the  veins  of  the  universe  with  strong,  resistless 
surge ;  when  fathers  teach  anew  the  angel's  message  of 
good  will  and  peace,  and  sons  build  high  their  goal  upon 
a  pedestal  of  service  and  of  truth,  —  then  nations  breathe 
and  live.  What  hope,  then,  asks  the  world,  finds  the  doc- 
trine of  peace  in  the  ideals  and  aspirations  of  America's 
youth  to-day? 

The  nation  faces  a  charge  of  militarism.  It  is  the  in- 
dictment of  her  critics  that  never  before  in  American  his- 
tory has  the  government  entertained  an  attitude  so  hostile 
toward  her  neighbors  and  so  dangerous  to  the  interests  of 
peace.  They  point  to  the  attempt  to  fortify  the  Canal  and 

67 


68  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

cry  out  that  America  would  drain  her  treasury  to  build  a 
monument  of  reproach  to  international  integrity.  They 
criticize  the  vast  appropriations  for  the  navy  and  declare 
that  America  is  starving  her  poor  that  she  may  more 
pompously  parade  the  seas.  They  protest  against  the 
"war-game"  on  the  Rio  Grande1  and  even  charge  that 
in  the  interest  of  a  Wall  Street  king  America  invites  the 
world  to  arms.  And  these  are  not  illusions.  The  lure  of 
gold  has  turned  the  nation  from  her  mission.  The  spirit 
of  commercialism  has  eclipsed  the  sentiment  of  brother- 
hood and  tempted  the  Republic  to  barter  her  honor  for 
the  price  of  imperial  supremacy.  Wherein,  then,  again 
asks  the  world,  finds  America  hope  for  the  future  ?  And 
to  the  charges  of  her  critics,  with  their  dismal  prophecy 
of  a  "wrong  forever  on  the  throne,"  this  is  the  nation's 
answer  and  defense  —  that  an  eclipse  is  never  perma- 
nent, that  the  world  stays  not  in  the  valley  of  the  shadow 
forever,  and  that  the  solution  of  the  problem,  the  fulfill- 
ment of  a  national  mission,  and  the  hope  of  world  peace 
find  their  common  assurance  in  the  changing  ideals  of 
America's  aspiring  young  men. 

The  young  American  is  essentially  ambitious.  He  is 
wont  to  seek  the  shortest  path  to  leadership,  and,  when 
blocked  at  one  highway,  to  turn  with  undiminished  ardor 
to  another.  And  his  ideal  is  a  mirror  of  the  age  in  which 
he  lives.  In  revolutionary  days  he  covets  the  glory  of 
a  minuteman,  and  in  the  deeds  of  Warren  and  Putnam 
finds  the  consummation  of  his  hopes.  Again,  in  the 
hour  of  civil  war  his  eyes  turn  toward  the  battlefield  — 
and  from  her  boys  under  twenty-one  the  Union  draws 

1  Part  of  the  United  States  army  was  mobilized  on  the  frontier  for  ma- 
neuvers, in  1911,  owing  to  the  Mexican  revolutionary  disturbances. — Editor. 


THJE  HOPE  OF  PEACE  69 

eighty -five  per  cent  of  her  defenders.  But  fortunately 
for  America  this  drama  of  the  youth's  ideal  has  one  more 
act.  The  lure  of  fife  and  drum  has  become  a  thing  of  the 
past.  The  glamour  of  military  life  has  become  a  dream  of 
yesterday.  The  young  man  is  learning  that  the  prize  of 
battle  is  never  equal  to  the  price.  And  with  the  grow- 
ing conviction  of  the  folly  and  futility  of  international 
strife  must  disappear  the  last  apology  for  war.  Nations 
will  cease  to  struggle,  not  when  they  have  learned  that 
war  is  a  tragedy  but  when  they  have  discovered  that  it 
is  a  farce. 

And  the  youth  of  to-day  is  learning  it.  In  the  same 
deplorable  conditions  which  the  nation's  critics  have  re- 
garded as  an  alarming  tendency  toward  militarism,  he 
reads  a  message  of  the  absurdity  of  war.  Militarism 
itself  is  revealing  a  mission.  Based  as  it  is  on  the  spirit 
of  aggrandizement,  it  is  teaching  to  youth  the  economic 
value  of  a  human  life.  It  is  uncovering  its  own  selfish 
motives  and  betraying  its  own  senseless  ends.  It  is  im- 
pressing the  world  with  the  truth  that  battles  are  fought 
for  purse  string  and  not  for  principle.  It  is  teaching  to 
youth  a  new  ideal ;  it  is  itself  the  answer  to  complaints 
of  friends  and  calumnies  of  foes.  It  is  the  cloud  before 
the  dawn.  It  heralds  the  coming  of  the  brightest  epoch 
yet  chronicled  in  American  history.  It  is  the  realization 
of  that  glorious  prophecy  of  John  Hay  that  the  time  is 
coming  when  "  the  clangor  of  arms  shall  cease,  and  we 
can  fancy  that  at  last  our  ears,  no  longer  stunned  by 
the  din  of  armies,  may  hear  the  morning  stars  singing 
together  and  all  the  sons  of  God  shouting  for  joy." 

And  is  this  but  the  dream  of  a  visionary  ?  Is  it  merely 
the  fancied  perception  of  an  inexistent  star  ?  Is  it  nothing 


70  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

more  than  a  groundless  hope  and  an  alluring  vagary  ? 
The  answer  is  visible  everywhere.  And  the  hope  of  peace 
finds  its  safest  assurance  among  the  institutions  of  learn- 
ing in  America.  James  Bryce  has  referred  to  the  United 
States  as  the  nation  having  the  largest  proportion  of  its 
young  men  in  college.  In  the  last  month  of  June  more 
than  fifty  thousand  collegians  wore  the  cap  and  gown  of 
graduation.  It  is  to  the  trust  of  the  college-bred  man  that 
the  peace  movement  confides  its  future,  and  modern  edu- 
cation assumes  no  greater  responsibility  than  the  training 
of  the  new  world-citizen.  Already  the  school  has  become 
the  most  potent  factor  in  the  new  uplift.  The  youth  is  no 
longer  dependent  upon  the  newspaper  for  his  knowledge 
of  world-politics.  An  intelligent  study  of  foreign  affairs 
is  at  last  regarded  as  of  as  much  importance  as  a  study 
of  the  past.  To  broaden  the  young  man's  vision  of  the 
world,  prominent  educators  are  even  advocating  travel- 
ing fellowships.  In  twenty -five  of  the  larger  universities 
of  America  an  association  of  Cosmopolitan  Clubs  is 
establishing  the  groundworks  for  a  wider  international 
fraternity.  Plans  are  already  under  way  to  have  an 
organized  delegation  of  more  than  a  hundred  students  of 
all  nationalities  present  at  the  third  Hague  Conference. 
Day  by  day  the  problem  of  world-unity  is  becoming  more 
and  more  deeply  embedded  in  the  mind  and  thought  of 
the  rising  generation.  More  and  more  is  youthful  patriot- 
ism becoming  a  realization  of  the  truth  that  "Above  all 
nations  is  humanity."  The  lure  of  war  is  losing  its  mag- 
netic power  and  the  brotherhood  of  man  becoming  more 
and  more  an  international  reality.  A  sentiment  for  uni- 
versal peace  is  sweeping  the  world,  and  behind  the  de- 
fenses of  advancing  civilization,  armed  with  the  strength 


THE  HOPE  OF  PEACE  71 

of  a  lofty  and  unselfish  purpose,  stands  an  army  of 
America's  young  men,  mustered  from  the  nation's  col- 
leges, enlisted  to  serve  for  an  eternity,  and  invulnerable 
in  the  protection  of  a  new  and  a  conquering  ideal. 

Therefore  the  significance  of  the  young  man  in  the 
world's  affairs  to-day  is  something  more  than  a  fancy. 
Again  and  again  the  plea  for  world-harmony  hears  a 
response  in  the  changing  ideals  of  a  new  generation.  The 
growing  sentiment  of  the  educated  youth  of  Japan  finds 
its  crystallization  in  the  efforts  of  Count  Okuma  toward 
the  consummation  of  world-disarmament.  The  spirit  of 
the  youth  of  England  finds  expression  in  the  ambitious 
dream  of  George  V,  whose  hope  it  is  to  tie  the  bond  of 
Anglo-Saxon  unity,  long  since  dissevered  by  George  III. 
Among  the  young  men  of  Russia  the  life  of  the  great 
philosopher  of  world-citizenship  has  left  a  lasting  con- 
viction of  the  senselessness  of  war.  Even  in  imperialistic 
Germany  the  reckless  building  of  dreadnoughts  brings  out 
a  vigorous  and  uncompromising  protest  from  the  think- 
ing youth  of  the  land.  In  America  a  vision  of  the  interna- 
tional parliament  of  man,  growing  large  in  the  minds 
of  her  leading  statesmen,  finds  expression  in  the  con- 
tinued philanthropy  of  a  great  industrial  king.  And, 
most  significant  of  all,  these  are  the  world-wide  examples 
that  the  college  man  enthrones  in  the  empire  of  his 
thoughts.  Sixty  thousand  European  students,  bound  to- 
gether by  the  cosmopolitan  ties  of  a  peace  fraternity,  have 
ceased  to  glorify  the  triumphs  of  the  battlefield.  The  com- 
mentaries of  the  hero-worshiper  to-day  do  not  record  the 
names  of  a  Marlborough  or  a  Bonaparte.  Rather  does 
the  young  man  find  his  idols  in  the  more  humble  annals 
of  a  Tolstoy  or  a  Hay.  And  the  new  ideal  of  international 


72  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

peace  is  not  merely  the  religion  of  a  few  enthusiasts.  In 
an  individual  way  these  apostles  of  peace  voice  to  the 
world  the  spirit  of  the  unnumbered  thousands  of  obscurer 
men  whose  lives  and  talents  are  directed,  not  to  the  con- 
struction of  material  kingdoms  but  to  the  building  of  a 
better  and  more  world-wide  brotherhood. 

Such  is  the  Hope  of  Peace.  The  nation's  critics  may 
continue  then:  indictment,  and,  pointing  out  the  crises 
of  the  hour,  paint  in  dismal  hues  a  picture  of  the  prob- 
lems never  to  be  solved  except  by  shot  and  shell.  Her 
skeptics,  blinded  by  thought  of  the  errors  of  the  past, 
may  prophesy  the  desecration  of  her  honor  and  the  dis- 
appointing failure  of  her  hopes.  The  press  may  pen  a 
graphic  story  of  the  military  spirit  of  the  age,  and  frown- 
ing patriarchs  relate  the  deeds  of  golden  days  gone  by. 
But  underneath  this  cloud  that  overhangs,  and  almost 
hidden  in  the  gloom  of  history's  disparagement,  the  new 
world-citizen  discerns  the  birth-light  of  a  brighter  and 
more  steadfast  star,  —  perceives  the  coming  triumph  of 
good  will  and  peace,  —  and  the  awakened  eyes  of  ex- 
pectant America  look  forward  with  promise  to  the  dawn 
of  that  new  day  when  a  nation  shall  be  judged  by  the 
weight  of  its  cross  and  not  by  the  wealth  of  its  crown. 


THE  ROOSEVELT  THEORY  OF  WAR 

By   PERCIVAL    V.    BLANSHARD,    University   of    Michigan, 
Ann   Arbor 

First  Prize  Oration  in  the  Western  Group  Contest,  1912,  and  in  the 
National  Contest  held  at  Mohonk  Lake,  May  16,  1912 


THE  ROOSEVELT  THEORY  OF  WAR 

Ex-President  Roosevelt  has  made  this  astounding 
statement,  "  By  war  alone  can  we  acquire  those  virile 
qualities  necessary  to  win  in  the  stern  strife  of  actual 
life."  These  words,  coming  from  the  lips  of  a  nation's 
idol,  have  fallen  like  a  bomb  shell  in  the  camp  of  the 
pacifists.  Not  that  Mr.  Roosevelt's  opinion  was  of  over- 
whelming weight,  but  that  he  was  voicing  the  opinion 
of  some  of  the  most  influential  thinkers  of  the  modern 
world.  Not  long  before  the  German  philosopher  Nietzsche 
had  taken  a  like  position,  and  he  was  indorsed  by  Von 
Moltke,  the  statesman ;  Ernest  Renan,  the  historian ; 
Hegel,  the  philosopher;  Charles  Kingsley  and  Canon 
Farrar,  the  divines.  We  must  have  a  care,  we  peace 
advocates,  how  we  treat  such  men's  opinions.  If  they 
are  right;  if,  as  they  maintain,  war  develops  a  nation, 
then  we  are  fighting  against  the  instrument  of  our  own 
salvation  and  smothering  the  only  hope  of  the  nation 
itself. 

But  are  they  right  ?  Does  war  make  for  national  great- 
ness ?  Before  we  can  give  a  rational  verdict  we  must 
answer  certain  other  questions.  What  is  our  nation,  any- 
way? What  are  the  factors  that  make  for  its  greatness? 
And  how  does  war  affect  these  factors  ? 

Plainly  our  nation  is  not  some  abstraction  that  haunts 
the  marble  halls  at  Washington.  Nor  is  it  our  vast  do- 
minion on  which,  like  England's,  the  sun  never  sets.  You 
will  find  it  rather  in  workshop  and  store  and  factory ; 

75 


76  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

it  is  no  more  nor  less  than  our  men.  If  the  capital  at 
Washington  is  founded  on  pygmy  manhood,  it  will  be 
blown  away  like  thistledown  before  some  passing  wind  of 
revolution.  Russia,  Turkey,  Spain,  will  tell  you  that.  If 
our  men  are  giants,  the  nation  will  be  lasting  as  adamant. 
England  and  Germany  and  America  are  monumental 
testimonies. 

Now  what  are  the  qualities  in  our  men  that  make 
the  nation  great? 

Here  a  problem  in  analysis  confronts  us.  Let  us  go 
about  it  as  does  the  student  in  the  laboratory.  He  dis- 
sects a  plant  or  mineral  to  find  the  mysteries  of  its  nature. 
We  are  to  dissect  a  civilization  to  find  the  factors  of  its 
strength.  One  little  specimen  will  reveal  the  secrets  of 
the  whole  species.  So  one  sample  of  civilization  will  show 
the  hidden  springs  of  all.  Go  with  me  to  the  public 
square  of  any  modern  city  and  there  you  will  behold  the 
qualities  that  build  all  civilization.  From  the  hum  and 
rattle  and  roar  that  rises  from  the  sea  of  humanity  come 
a  thousand  various  voices,  but  all  speak  of  one  theme 
-  industry.  There  in  the  center  of  the  throng  and  press 
a  slender  monument  rises,  crowned  perhaps  with  a  figure 
of  Liberty  or  Justice.  It  tells  you  a  simple  story  of 
Idealism.  Yonder  stands  a  silent,  vine-clad  church, 
crowned  by  a  mighty  finger  pointing  heavenward  and 
beckoning  always  to  the  higher  life.  What  need  of  going 
farther  ?  Industry,  Idealism,  Morality  —  already  we  have 
found  the  secret  of  human  success,  the  triple  key  to  all 
advance,  of  man  or  group  or  nation.  Here  is  Carlyle,  with 
his  gospel  of  labor,  the  labor  that  conquers  all  things ; 
here  is  Ruskin,  with  his  exalting  idealism,  that  gives  an 
aim  and  purpose  to  all  human  toil;  here  is  the  great 


THE  ROOSEVELT  THEORY  OF  WAR  77 

apostle  Paul  himself,  who  transfigures  that  toil  and 
exalts  that  purpose  with  his  everlasting  gospel  of  moral 
sublimity.  Here  is  our  threefold  criterion,  by  which  every 
nation  must  stand  or  fall.  The  Anglo-Saxon  is  what  he 
is  through  unceasing  industry,  perpetual  aspiration,  and 
moral  strength.  The  Central  African  is  what  he  is  through 
inbred  sluggishness,  total  lack  of  purpose,  and  almost  total 
absence  of  morality. 

These  are  the  basic  elements  of  national  greatness.  But 
the  great  question  still  remains,  How  does  war  affect 
them  ? 

Concerning  the  effect  of  war  on  labor,  we  declare  un- 
hesitatingly that  the  two  are  everlasting  foes,  and  that 
whenever  War  lays  hands  on  Labor's  throat,  it  strangles 
her.  This  is  part  of  the  inevitable  program  of  war,  for 
note  that  it  is  on  the  laboring  men  that  the  dreadful 
claims  of  war  must  fall.  Mark  its  course.  A  bugle  sounds 
the  call  to  arms.  From  workshop,  mill,  and  factory  the 
laborers  pour  forth ;  out  go  the  men  into  a  trade  where 
plunder  and  robbery  are  a  means  of  livelihood;  when 
pillage  and  slaughter  wane,  indolence  becomes  the  order 
of  the  day ;  commerce  degenerates  into  blockade-running 
by  sea  and  marauding  by  land.  How  tame  the  life  of 
peace  to  this  wild  life  of  war !  And  all  the  time  the  love 
of  toil  is  fading  from  men's  minds ;  at  home  the  factory 
wheels  are  turning  more  and  more  feebly,  and  when  at 
last  the  sword  is  laid  aside,  there  is  only  "  confusion 
worse  confounded,"  for  the  channels  of  labor  are  choked 
with  men  reared  in  habits  of  indolence  or  trained  in  the 
school  of  vice.  Before  the  scar  on  that  nation's  industry 
can  finally  be  healed,  decades  and  perhaps  centuries  of 
peace  must  pass  away. 


78  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

But  if  war  is  a  scar  on  the  nation's  industry,  it  is  like- 
wise a  blot  on  her  ideals.  Though  this  element  of  idealism 
at  first  seems  visionary  and  impractical,  it  is  one  of  the 
foundation  stones  of  progress.  The  fixed  gulf  between 
what  man  is  and  what  he  knows  he  might  be  is  the 
decisive  factor  in  his  advance.  Ideals  are  the  pulleys  of 
the  unseen,  round  which  man  throws  his  hopes  and  aims, 
by  which  he  pulls  himself  across  the  chasm  and  into  the 
larger  life.  To  advance  at  all,  man  must  have  ideals — for 
himself,  for  his  family,  for  his  nation.  But  mark  the  effect 
of  war  on  these  ideals.  In  place  of  the  ideal  of  peace — to 
serve  men  and  uplift  them —  one  is  taught  the  ideal  of  war 
—  to  make  himself  the  most  widely  feared  of  professional 
murderers.  Instead  of  the  ideal  of  peace  —  to  make  his 
family  comfortable,  happy,  and  prosperous — comes  in  the 
war  ideal,  by  whose  terms  the  family  head  deserts  his 
own  flock  to  kill  other  family  heads  for  the  eternal  glory 
of  the  Stars  and  Stripes.  As  for  his  ideal  of  the  nation's 
greatness,  we  have  ample  testimony  that  when  bullets 
and  cannon  balls  come  crashing  through  the  spendid 
structure  of  his  purpose,  it  speedily  crumbles  into  an 
ignominious  desire  to  hide  himself  behind  the  nearest 
tree.  No ;  do  not  say  that  war  builds  up  ideals ;  it  tears 
them  down  and  tramples  them  in  the  dust;  aye  more,  it 
sets  back  crime  itself  where  they  should  rightly  stand. 

But  if  war  so  dethrones  a  nation's  ideals,  what  may  it 
not  do  to  a  nation's  morality  ?  Imagine  if  you  can  a  mil- 
lion men,  the  core  of  the  national  power,  turning  them- 
selves into  machines  to  carry  out  blindly  the  schemes 
of  leaders  who  may  be  right  or  wrong ;  schooled  in  the 
belief  that  manslaughter  is  manliness,  that  the  rash 
courage  of  the  brute  is  above  the  moral  courage  of  a  man ; 


THE  ROOSEVELT  THEORY  OF  WAR  79 

forgetful  of  the  meaning  of  human  life ;  thoughtless  of  a 
thing  so  common  as  death ;  heedless  of  its  eternal  con- 
sequences. No  wonder  Channing  cried  so  bitterly :  "  War 
is  the  concentration  of  all  human  crimes.  Under  its  stand- 
ard gather  violence,  malignity,  rage,  fraud,  rapacity,  and 
lust.  If  it  only  slew  men,  it  would  do  little.  But  it  turns 
man  into  a  beast  of  prey.  Here  is  the  evil  of  war,  that 
man,  made  to  be  the  brother,  becomes  the  deadly  foe  of 
his  kind ;  that  man,  whose  duty  is  to  mitigate  suffering, 
makes  the  infliction  of  suffering  his  study  and  end." 

No,  Mr.  Roosevelt,  for  once  at  least  you  are  wrong ! 
We  cannot  believe  that  war  builds  up  a  nation.  Rather 
will  we  believe  those  words  of  Herbert  Spencer,  more 
sweeping  but  far  more  true,  "Advance  to  the  highest 
forms  of  man  and  society  depends  on  the  decline  of 
militancy  and  the  growth  of  industrialism." 

"  But  wait,"  you  say ;  "all  this  is  theory  and  abstrac- 
tion. We  want  matters  of  fact.  Your  case  may  be  true 
as  philosophy,  but  you  have  failed  to  ground  it  in  ex- 
ample." So  it  is  to  history  that  our  last  appeal  must  be 
made,  for,  says  Bolingbroke,  "  History  is  philosophy, 
teaching  by  example."  Every  decree  of  her  stern  tribunal 
is  impartial  and  irrevocable.  War  the  tonic  or  war  the 
poison  ?  She  is  the  final  judge.  She  will  take  you  back,  if 
you  will,  to  her  childhood  days  and  point  you  out  vast  em- 
pires, owning  the  known  world,  Babylonians,  Assyrians, 
Egyptians,  Medes,  and  Persians,  fearful  fighters  all  of 
them.  But  no,  not  quite  all  either.  On  a  sandy  stretch  of 
seashore,  half  hidden  by  the  unwieldy  empires  around  it, 
we  see  a  timid,  peaceful  little  people  called  the  Hebrews  ; 
they  alone,  from  all  that  mighty  company,  have  stood  the 
"  wreckful  siege  "  of  thirty  centuries.  Watch  its  sinister 


80  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

movement  down  the  ages  and  you  will  see  the  war  cloud 
hover  over  Greece,  and  her  republics  melt  to  nothing  in 
disunion  and  decay.  It  hovers  over  the  Huns,  and  they 
suddenly  sink  from  sight ;  over  Islam,  and  its  civilization 
crumbles  faster  than  it  grew;  over  Spain,  and  all  the 
New  World  treasures  cannot  save  her  from  decay.  Fin- 
ally, like  the  cloud  no  bigger  than  a  hand,  it  rises  from 
the  island  of  Corsica  and  moves  toward  Central  Europe. 
All  too  well  does  Europe  know  its  meaning.  From  north 
and  south,  from  east  and  west,  she  pours  into  the  field  the 
finest  armies  that  the  Old  World  ever  saw.  Then  she 
pauses.  Europe  grows  tense  with  a  nameless  dread.  The 
storm  cloud  blackens,  hovers  lower,  then  bursts  with  all 
its  fury  through  the  continent.  For  ten  long  years,  at  the 
command  of  an  imperial  butcher,  the  soil  is  drenched  with 
blood,  the  sky  grows  lurid  from  burning  Paris  to  burning 
Moscow,  three  million  homes  are  draped  in  black.  Grand, 
indeed,  and  glorious !  But  Europe  lost  more  than  her 
gorgeous  standards,  more  than  her  ruined  cities  ;  she  left 
her  manhood  on  those  bloody  fields. 

We  might  extend  the  awful  picture,  but  the  story  is 
the  same,  dread  tale  of  death  for  nations  as  for  men.  Is 
not  this  enough?  Is  it  not  clear  that  this  traitor  to 
labor,  this  despoiler  of  ideals,  this  foe  to  morality,  is  not 
the  benefactor  but  the  destroyer  of  nations  ?  And  shall 
we  not  "here  highly  resolve"  no  longer  to  walk  in  this 
"  valley  of  the  shadow  of  death,"  but  to  hasten  toward  the 
dawning  of  a  brighter,  purer  day  ?  For  in  spite  of  pessi- 
mism, in  spite  of  scholarship,  in  spite  of  history,  the  day  is 

"  coming  yet,  for  a'  that  — 
When  man  to  man,  the  world  o'er, 
Shall  brothers  be  for  a'  that." 


NATIONAL  HONOR  AND  VITAL  INTERESTS 

By  RUSSELL  WEISMAN,  Western  Reserve  University 
Cleveland,  Ohio 

First  Prize  Oration  in  the  Eastern  Group  Contest,  1912,  and  Second 
Prize  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  Mohonk  Lake,  May  16,  1912 


NATIONAL  HONOR  AND  VITAL  INTERESTS 

The  day  for  deprecating  in  general  terms  the  evils  of 
war  and  of  extolling  the  glories  of  peace  is  past.  Such 
argument  is  little  needed.  International  trade  requires 
peace.  International  finance  dictates  peace.  Even  armies 
and  navies  are  now  justified  primarily  as  agents  of  peace. 
Yet  so  wantonly  are  these  agents  looting  the  world's  treas- 
uries that  they  are  themselves  forcing  their  own  displace- 
ment by  courts  of  arbitration.  The  two  hundred  and 
fifty  disputes  successfully  arbitrated  in  the  past  century 
challenge  with  trumpet-tongued  eloquence  the  support 
of  all  men  for  reason's  peaceful  rule.  To-day  no  discus- 
sion is  needed  to  show  that  if  war  is  to  be  abolished,  if 
navies  are  to  dwindle  and  armies  diminish,  if  there  is 
to  be  a  federation  of  the  world,  it  must  come  through 
treaties  of  arbitration.  In  this  way  alone  lies  peace ;  yet 
in  this  way  lies  the  present  great  barrier  to  further 
progress  —  the  conception  which  many  nations,  especially 
the  United  States,  hold  of  "  national  honor  and  vital 
interests."  The  reservation  from  arbitration  of  so-called 
matters  of  national  honor  and  vital  interests  constitutes 
the  weak  link  in  every  existing  arbitration  treaty  between 
the  great  powers  of  the  world.  This  reservation  fur- 
nishes the  big-navy  men  all  the  argument  they  need.  It- 
destroys  the  binding  power  of  the  treaties  by  allowing 
either  party  to  any  dispute  to  refuse  arbitration.  It  was 
by  this  reservation  that  the  United  States  Senate  so  lately 

83 


84  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

killed  the  British  and  the  French  treaties.  And  I  contend 
here  to-night  that  the  one  subject  which  imperatively  de- 
mands discussion  is  national  honor  and  vital  interests. 
That  the  next  important  step  must  be  the  exposure  of 
the  reactionary  influence  of  the  United  States  in  except- 
ing these  matters  from  arbitration. 

Only  fifteen  months  ago  President  Taft  made  his  mem- 
orable declaration  that  this  barrier  ought  to  be  removed 
from  the  pathway  of  peace.  He  proposed  that  the  United 
States  negotiate  new  treaties  to  abide  by  the  adjudication 
of  courts  in  every  international  issue  which  could  not  be 
settled  by  negotiation,  whether  involving  honor  or  terri- 
tory or  money.  The  next  morning  the  proposal  was 
heralded  by  the  press  throughout  the  world.  A  few  days 
later  the  halls  of  Parliament  resounded  with  applause 
when  Great  Britain's  secretary  of  state  for  foreign  affairs 
announced  that  his  government  would  welcome  such  a 
treaty  with  the  United  States.  France  soon  followed. 
Then,  to  the  surprise  of  all,  hesitating  Germany  and 
cautious  Japan  showed  a  like  willingness  to  enter  into 
such  agreements.  Universal  peace  seemed  all  but  realized. 

The  cause  was  at  once  borne  up  on  a  mighty  wave 
of  public  opinion.  The  peace  societies  were  in  a  frenzy 
of  activity.  Mass  meetings  of  indorsement  were  held  in 
England  and  America.  Editorials  of  approval  appeared 
in  all  parts  of  the  world.  The  movement  was  now  irre- 
sistible. Within  eight  months  the  British  and  the  French 
treaties  were  drafted.  Three  of  the  greatest  nations  of 
the  world  were  at  last  to  commit  themselves  unreservedly 
to  the  cause  of  international  peace.  Even  disputes  in- 
volving national  honor  should  not  halt  the  beneficent 
work  of  high  courts  of  law  and  of  reason.  The  day  when 


NATIONAL  HONOR  AND  VITAL  INTERESTS        85 

the  treaties  were  signed,  August  3,  1911,  was  hailed  as 
a  red-letter  day  in  the  annals  of  the  civilized  world.  It 
was  proclaimed  the  dawn  of  a  new  and  auspicious  era  in 
the  affairs  of  men  and  of  nations. 

During  all  the  months  preceding  the  action  of  the 
Senate  on  these  treaties  the  only  statesman  of  any  prom- 
inence to  raise  his  voice  in  opposition  was  ex-President 
Theodore  Roosevelt.  The  gist  of  his  successive  and  vio- 
lent attacks  on  the  treaties  is  contained  in  this  utterance, 
which  I  quote,  "  It  would  be  not  merely  foolish  but 
wicked  for  us  as  a  nation  to  agree  to  arbitrate  any  dis- 
pute that  affects  our  vital  interests  or  our  independence 
or  our  honor."  In  this  spirit,  to  the  surprise  and  dis- 
appointment of  the  whole  nation,  the  Senate  amended  the 
treaties  out  of  their  original  intent,  and  placed  upon  them 
limitations  that  defeated  their  purpose.  By  the  Senate's 
action  the  United  States  is  still  committed  to  the  pre- 
tense that  there  may  be  occasion  for  a  just  and  solemn 
war,  that  vital  interests  and  national  honor  may  force 
us  to  fight. 

What,  then,  are  the  vital  interests  that  can  be  con- 
served only  by  saber  and  bullet  ?  Nothing  more,  nothing 
less,  according  to  various  acknowledged  authorities,  than 
a  state's  independence  and  its  territorial  integrity.  Did 
the  keen  mind  of  our  former  president  really  foresee  the 
seizure  of  some  of  our  territory  by  England  or  France  ? 
Yet  he  protests  it  that  it  would  be  "  not  merely  foolish  but 
wicked  for  us  as  a  nation  to  agree  to  arbitrate  any  dis- 
pute that  affects  our  vital  interests."  Did  Senator  Lodge 
and  his  threescore  colleagues  who  amended  the  treaties 
actually  fear  an  attempt  to  overthrow  our  form  of  gov- 
ernment, to  destroy  our  political  institutions,  or  to  take 


86  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

away  those  individual  rights  and  sacred  privileges  upon 
which  our  government  was  founded  ?  Yet  to  save  us 
from  such  fate  they  refused  unlimited  arbitration. 

For  the  United  States  to  except  from  arbitration  her 
vital  interests  is  obvious  pretense.  To  add  thereto  her 
national  honor  is  extreme  hypocrisy.  What  is  national 
honor  ?  No  man  knows.  It  is  one  thing  to-day;  another, 
to-morrow.  It  may  involve  an  indemnity  claim,  a  bound- 
ary line,  a  fisheries  dispute.  In  fact,  any  controversy  may 
be  declared  by  either  party,  at  will,  to  be  a  question  of 
national  honor.  Thus  in  the  hands  of  an  unskilled  or 
malicious  diplomacy,  any  question  which  was  originally 
a  judicial  one  may  become  a  question  of  national  honor. 
What,  then,  will  we  arbitrate  ?  Every  case  in  which  a 
favorable  award  is  assured  us.  If  we  want  Texas,  we 
send  an  army  after  it.  Every  case  that  does  not  rouse 
our  anger.  Let  the  Maine  blow  up  and  we  fight.  A  treaty 
with  an  elastic  exception  like  this  is  a  farcical  sham  and 
a  delusion. 

It  is  high  time  the  true  and  humiliating  significance 
of  these  fearsome  phrases  should  be  as  familiar  to  every 
taxpayer  as  is  the  burden  of  bristling  camps  and  restless 
navies.  Read  the  record  of  Great  Britain's  first  offer  of 
unlimited  arbitration  in  the  Olney-Pauncefote  treaty  of 
1897.  There,  too,  you  will  find  national  honor  and  vital 
interests  clogging  the  machinery  of  universal  peace.  By 
these  same  exceptions  the  Senate  emasculated  that  treaty 
and  defeated  the  spirit  of  the  agreement.  Is  it  conceiv- 
able that  the  Senate  actually  feared  that  our  interests 
would  be  imperiled  by  that  treaty  ?  Did  it  delve  out 
some  hidden  dangers  which  escaped  the  careful  scrutiny 
of  both  the  English  and  American  embassies,  some  peril 


NATIONAL  HONOR  AND  VITAL  INTERESTS        87 

unforeseen  by  the  keen  judicial  mind  of  President  Cleve- 
land, who  characterized  the  defeat  of  the  treaty  as  "  the 
greatest  grief  "  of  his  administration. 

But  this  is  not  all.  The  American  representatives  at 
both  Hague  Conferences  were  the  first  to  place  these 
same  limitations  on  all  arbitration  proposals. 

Look  at  it  from  what  point  of  view  you  will,  our  gov- 
ernment's conduct  must  appear  humiliating.  Considering 
the  fact  that  universal  arbitration  treaties  have  proved 
practical,  it  is  well-nigh  incredible.  Behold  our  bellicose 
sister  American  republics.  Argentina  and  Chile,  Brazil 
and  Argentina,  Bolivia  and  Peru,  all  have  agreements 
for  the  arbitration  of  all  questions  whatsoever.  All  the 
Central  American  republics  are  bound  by  treaty  to  decide 
every  difference  of  whatever  nature  in  the  Central  Ameri- 
can Court  of  Justice.  Denmark's  three  treaties  with  Italy, 
Portugal,  and  the  Netherlands  withhold  no  cause,  how- 
ever vital,  from  reason's  peaceful  sway.  Norway  and 
Sweden  likewise  have  an  agreement  to  abide  by  the  de- 
cision of  the  Hague  Court  in  whatever  disputes  may 
occur.  The  very  existence  of  all  these  treaties  is  signifi- 
cant, yet  even  more  significant  is  the  fact  that  they  have 
been  triumphantly  tested.  Norway  and  Sweden  at  one 
extremity  of  the  globe  and  Argentina  and  Chile  at  the 
other  have  thus  quietly  settled  disputes  in  which  their 
honor  and  interests  were  seriously  involved. 

Do  you  ask  further  evidence  of  the  hypocrisy  with 
which  our  Senate  parades  our  national  honor  and  our 
vital  interests  to  the  undoing  of  a  grand  work?  Search 
our  history  and  you  will  find  it  in  abundance.  In  the 
great  case  of  the  Alabama  claims,  Charles  Francis  Adams 
pronounced  the  construction  of  Confederate  ships  in 


88  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

English  ports  to  be  a  violation  of  the  international  law 
of  neutrality.  This  certainly  was  a  question  of  national 
honor  and  vital  interests,  yet  he  pleaded  for  arbitration. 
In  reply  Lord  John  Russell  said,  "  That  is  a  question  of 
honor  which  we  will  never  arbitrate,  for  England's  honor 
cannot  be  made  the  subject  of  arbitration."  The  case 
was  debated  for  six  years.  Then  came  England's  "  Grand 
Old  Man,"  the  mighty  Gladstone,  with  a  different  view. 
" It  is  to  the  interest,"  he  said,  "not  only  of  England  and 
the  United  States,  but  of  the  world,  peaceably  to  settle 
those  claims."  He  submitted  them  to  a  joint  high  com- 
mission. England  lost  and  paid.  Thus  the  honor  of  both 
nations  was  successfully  arbitrated.  Likewise  the  New- 
foundland fisheries  case  had  been  a  bone  of  contention 
between  Great  Britain  and  America  from  the  day  our 
independence  was  recognized.  As  late  as  1887  it  threat- 
ened to  become  the  cause  of  war.  No  question  ever  arose 
which  more  vitally  affected  the  interests  of  America,  yet 
the  Senate  recently  accepted  a  settlement  by  arbitration. 
Similarly,  the  Alaska  fur  seal  dispute,  the  Alaskan  and 
the  Venezuelan  boundary  disputes,  and  the  northeast 
boundary  controversy  all  involved  both  the  vital  interests 
and  the  national  honor  of  England  and  America,  yet 
all  were  satisfactorily  and  permanently  arbitrated.  So 
excited  were  we  over  our  northwest  boundary  that  the 
principal  issue  of  a  political  campaign  was  "  The  whole 
of  Oregon  or  none  !  Fifty-four  forty  or  fight !  "  Yet  we 
peaceably  acquiesced  in  a  treaty  that  gave  us  neither. 

Yes,  our  honor  may  be  arbitrated.  If  we  are  ill- 
prepared  for  war,  we  arbitrate.  If  we  are  sure  of  a 
favorable  award,  we  arbitrate.  But  we  must  have  a 
loophole,  an  ever-ready  escape  from  obligation.  Posing 
%as  the  most  enlightened  nation  on  the  face  of  the  globe, 


NATIONAL  HONOR  AND  VITAL  INTERESTS        89 

we  refuse  entirely  to  displace  those  medieval  notions 
according  to  which  personal  honor  found  its  best  pro- 
tection in  the  dueling  pistol,  and  national  honor  its  only 
vindication  in  slaughter  and  devastation.  To  unlimited 
arbitration  we  refuse  to  submit. 

Fifteen  years  ago  England,  the  mighty  England,  gave 
us  her  pledge  that  no  cause  should  ever  justify  war.  This 
pledge  our  Senate  in  the  name  of  honor  refused.  Un- 
limited arbitration  agreements  were  suggested  at  both 
Hague  Conferences.  Americans  promptly  placed  restric- 
tions upon  them  in  the  name  of  honor.  Again  has  England 
with  enthusiasm  just  offered  us  unrestricted  arbitration. 
Again  she  is  repulsed  by  our  Senate  in  the  name  of 
honor.  France,  too,  bears  to  our  doors  an  unqualified 
pledge  of  arbitration.  France,  too,  is  repulsed  by  our 
Senate  in  the  name  of  honor.  Germany  and  Japan  ex- 
press a  desire  to  settle  every  question  at  the  bar  of  jus- 
tice. Impelled  by  honor  we  pass  their  desire  unheeded. 
Our  Clevelands,  our  Olneys,  our  Edward  Everett  Hales, 
our  Carl  Schurzes,  our  John  Hays,  have  all  urged  unlim- 
ited arbitration.  Our  Davises  and  Clarks  and  Platts 
and  Quays  in  Senate  seats  have  undone  their  work  in 
the  name  of  honor.  Our  Charles  Eliots  and  Nicholas 
Butlers,  our  Albert  Shaws  and  Hamilton  Holts,  now 
plead  for  universal  peace  through  unlimited  arbitration. 
Senators  Bacon  and  Lodge  and  Heyburn  and  Hitchcock, 
apparently  impelled  by  constitutional  prerogative,  party 
prejudice,  or  personal  animosity,  now  cast  their  votes  for 
limitations  in  the  name  of  honor.  From  the  platform  of 
peace  conferences,  from  the  halls  of  colleges,  from  the 
pulpit  and  the  bench,  from  the  offices  of  bankers  and 
merchants  and  manufacturers,  from  the  press,  with 
scarcely  a  column's  exception,  there  arises  a  swelling 


90  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

plea  for  treaties  of  arbitration  that  know  no  exceptions. 
In  the  name  of  honor  that  plea  is  defied. 

Honor  ?  No,  an  ocean  of  exception  large  enough  to 
float  any  number  of  battleships  for  which  pride  and  ambi- 
tion may  be  willing  to  pay !  Honor  ?  No,  a  finical  and 
foolish  reservation  that  at  any  moment  may  become  a 
maelstrom  of  suspicion  and  rage  and  hatred  and  destruc- 
tion and  death !  Honor  ?  No,  a  mountainous  barrier  to 
peace  that  must  be  leveled  before  there  can  be  progress ! 
Honor  ?  No,  the  incarnation  of  selfishness,  the  cloak  of 
shrewd  politics,  the  mask  of  false  patriotism !  National 
honor  ?  No,  national  dishonor  ! 

Before  the  nations  of  the  world  the  United  States 
stands  to-day  in  an  unenviable  light.  It  is  a  false  light. 
Since  the  days  of  William  Penn  and  Benjamin  Franklin 
our  people  have  led  in  much  of  the  march  upward  from 
the  slough  of  weltering  strife.  Many  a  stumblingblock 
to  progress  we  have  removed  from  the  rugged  pathway, 
but  for  fifteen  years  our  government  has  refused  to  touch 
the  barrier  of  national  honor  and  vital  interests.  England 
and  France  have  now  laid  this  duty  squarely  at  our  door. 
"It  is  a  social  obligation  as  imperative  as  the  law  of 
Moses,  as  full  of  hope  as  the  Great  Physician's  healing 
touch."  Let  us  here  highly  resolve  that  there  shall  be 
uttered  a  new  official  interpretation  of  national  honor  and 
vital  interests,  an  interpretation  synonymous  with  dignity 
and  fidelity,  sincerity,  and  integrity,  and  confidence  in  the 
vows  both  of  men  and  of  nations.  "  If  we  have  '  faith 
in  the  right  as  God  gives  us  to  see  the  right,'  we  shall 
catch  a  vision  of  opportunity  that  shall  fire  the  soul  with 
a  spirit  of  service  which  the  darkness  of  night  shall  not 
arrest,  which  the  course  of  the  day  shall  not  weary." 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  PATRIOTISM 

By  PAUL  B.  BLANSHARD,  University  of  Michigan,  Ann  Arbor 

First  Prize  Oration  in  the  Central  Group  Contest,  1913,  and  in  the 
National  Contest  held  at  Mohonk  Lake,  May  15,  1913 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  PATRIOTISM 

Robert  Southey  has  asked  through  the  lips  of  a  little 
child  the  greatest  peace  question  that  the  world  has 
known.  He  pictures  a  summer  evening  on  the  old  battle- 
field of  Blenheim.  On  a  chair  before  his  vine-clad  cottage 
sat  old  Kaspar  while  his  grandchildren,  Wilhelmine  and 
Peterkin,  played  on  the  lawn.  Suddenly  Peterkin  from 
a  nearby  brook  unearthed  a  skull  and,  running,  brought 
it  to  Kaspar's  knee.  The  old  man  took  the  gruesome 
thing  from  the  boy,  and  told  him  that  this  had  been  the 
head  of  a  man  killed  in  the  great  battle  of  Blenheim. 
Then  little  Wilhelmine  looked  up  into  her  grandfather's 
face  and  said : 

"  Now  tell  us  all  about  the  war, 

And  what  they  fought  each  other  for." 

Here  we  have  the  central  question  in  the  problem  of 
war.  Why  do  men  fight  ?  Through  the  answer  to  that 
question  lies  the  path  to  world-peace. 

Few  men  fight  to-day  for  glory.  Modern  militarism 
has  no  place  for  Lancelots  and  Galahads.  The  glory  of 
the  regiment  has  absorbed  the  glory  of  the  individual. 
Few  men  fight  to-day  to  gain  great  wealth.  The  treas- 
ures that  glittered  before  Pizarro  do  not  tempt  our  sol- 
diers. Material  wealth  is  more  easily  won  in  factory  or 
farm  or  mill.  Few  men  fight  to-day  for  religion.  The 
conquest  of  religion  has  become  a  conquest  of  peace  ; 
the  very  ideal  of  peace  is  an  end  of  religion  itself.  Glory, 


94  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

wealth,  religion  —  these  are  no  longer  the  causes  of  war. 
Then  why  do  men  fight  ?  The  answer  is  obvious.  Men 
fight  to-day  for  patriotism.  Patriotism  is  the  cause  of  war. 

The  next  step  in  our  reasoning  is  more  difficult.  If 
patriotism  is  the  cause  of  war,  how  shall  we  treat  the 
cause  to  destroy  the  result  ?  Shall  we  attempt  to  abolish 
patriotism  as  Tolstoy  would  have  us  do,  or  shall  we  try 
to  change  its  nature  so  that  war  as  a  natural  result  will 
be  impossible  ?  To  answer  these  questions  we  must 
study  patriotism  from  its  very  beginnings.  We  must 
ask :  What  is  patriotism  ?  Where  did  it  come  from  ? 
What  place  has  it  in  our  life  ? 

Observe  first  the  simplest  cell  of  life,  the  amoeba.  We 
can  watch  it  through  the  microscope.  It  is  so  tiny  that 
it  keeps  house  in  a  drop  of  water.  It  has  neither  emotion 
nor  consciousness,  in  the  human  sense.  It  lives  a  while, 
and  then  splits  in  two  to  form  other  cells  that  have  no 
connection  with  each  other.  Yet  this  infinitesimal  bit  of 
life  has  an  instinct,  the  instinct  to  save  itself.  Watch  an 
amoeba  as  fire  is  brought  near.  It  immediately  moves 
away.  Its  every  act  is  regulated  by  this  one  instinct, 
self-preservation. 

Now  let  us  leave  the  microscope  and  go  outdoors. 
Over  there  is  a  bird  in  a  tree  top,  feeding  its  young  in 
a  nest.  Suppose  that  a  fire  should  suddenly  consume 
the  tree.  Would  the  mother  bird  fly  away  in  safety  ? 
No,  it  would  die  on  its  nest  in  the  effort  to  save  its 
young.  There  is  more  than  self-preservation  here.  The 
scientist  will  tell  you  that  the  instinct  has  expanded  to 
include  the  preservation  of  the  offspring. 

And  now  turn  to  primitive  man.  The  recent  excava- 
tions in  Sussex  will  give  us  a  picture  of  him.  He  is  a 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  PATRIOTISM  95 

wild,  gorilla-like  figure  that  creeps  beneath  the  trees. 
He  can  leap  with  lightning  force  on  his  prey.  He  drapes 
his  body  with  bearskins,  and  eats  meat  from  fingers 
that  end  in  claws.  And  yet  with  all  his  savage  ferocity, 
this  is  more  than  an  animal.  This  is  a  man.  In  his  breast 
there  stir  the  instincts  of  a  man.  In  his  life  we  see  the 
vital  element  of  patriotism,  love.  His  little  savage  family 
is  more  precious  to  him  than  all  the  world.  He  will  fight 
and  die,  not  only  for  self-preservation  but  for  those 
who  to  him  are  "  brother  and  sister  and  mother."  This 
is  the  stamp  of  the  human.  This  is  the  potentially  divine. 

But  as  the  storms  of  war  beat  about  these  little  savage 
families,  the  sense  of  common  danger  welded  them  into 
one.  Out  of  grim  necessity  friendship  came,  and  friend- 
ship gave  birth  to  patriotism.  Loyalty  and  sacrifice  were 
not  limited  to  the  family ;  men  fought  and  died  for 
their  tribe. 

And  now  let  us  turn  the  microscope  upon  ourselves. 
We  would  fight  for  our  country.  We  say  because  we 
love  our  country.  We  call  that  feeling  patriotism.  It  is 
more  extended  than  the  savage  love  of  tribe;  it  gives 
loyalty  to  a  great  government  and  democratic  principles. 
We  speak  of  that  feeling  as  divine,  but  it  is  terribly 
human.  Its  expression  is  the  same  harsh  ferocity  that 
inspired  the  life  of  the  savage. 

To-morrow  America  goes  to  war.  In  great  black  type 
we  read  the  call  for  men,  and  a  sense  of  common  danger 
thrills  us.  In  the  evening  by  a  street  lamp's  glare  we 
watch  a  passionate  agitator  who  points  to  a  flag  that  we 
have  learned  to  love.  The  tramp,  tramp  of  passing  regi- 
ments and  the  sound  of  martial  music  thrill  us.  We  lay 
down  our  tool  or  pen  and  march  to  the  front.  And  then 


96  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

comes  the  first  engagement.  The  air  is  blackened  with 
rifle  smoke ;  the  roar  of  cannonry  deafens  us.  Dazed, 
we  crouch  behind  an  earthwork  while  the  enemy  creeps 
through  the  smoke.  Suddenly  they  charge.  We  fire, 
but  they  surge  on  through  the  smoke.  They  mount  the 
earthwork.  We  leap  together !  Men  scream  hoarsely  ! 
Musket  butts  crash !  Daggers  plunge  into  quivering 
flesh  !  Divine  feeling  !  Glorious  patriotism ! 

The  passing  of  this  savage  patriotism  is  inevitable. 
The  whole  course  of  nature  is  against  it.  The  very  his- 
tory of  development  will  tell  you  that.  Loyalty  has 
never  been  an  immutable  thing.  It  has  been  a  ceaseless 
and  irresistible  growth  from  the  individual  to  the  family, 
to  the  tribe,  to  the  nation.  The  time  for  a  world-patri- 
otism has  come.  Why  should  men  limit  their  loyalty  by 
a  row  of  stones  and  trees  that  we  call  a  boundary? 
Why  are  men  patriots,  anyway,  except  to  save  their 
privileges  and  their  government  ?  The  primitive  patriot 
had  no  choice  but  to  fight.  He  was  put  down  in  a  little 
plot  of  cleared  ground  hemmed  in  by  mighty  forests, 
and  made  to  hew  out  a  home  in  a  vast  world  of  enemies. 
But  how  far  we  have  come  from  him !  The  twentieth- 
century  world  is  a  little  world.  Our  earth  is  like  an  open 
book.  We  have  cut  through  the  jungle  wastes  of  Africa; 
we  have  photographed  the  poles.  We  sell  and  buy  things 
from  Greenland  and  Java.  In  such  a  civilization  war- 
patriotism  has  no  place.  It  is  no  longer  the  only  guide 
to  self-preservation ;  it  has  become  the  most  terrible  in- 
strument of  self-destruction.  And  for  just  this  reason 
war-patriotism  must  go.  It  runs  counter  to  the  whole 
trend  of  nature  itself.  It  is  diametrically  opposed  to  the 
mission  of  patriotism  in  the  world.  Just  as  those  little 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  PATRIOTISM  97 

savage  families  joined  hands  in  tribal  loyalty,  just  as  the 
scattered  clans  and  tribes  united  under  national  govern- 
ment, so  nations  must  clasp  hands  around  the  globe  in  a 
new  spirit  of  "  worldism  "  that  shall  make  war  impossible. 

But  we  cannot  gain  a  world-spirit  by  a  sudden  destruc- 
tion of  our  patriotism.  We  will  never  usher  in  tranquillity 
with  a  crash.  The  nihilism  of  Tolstoy  would  plunge  us 
into  lawlessness  and  anarchy,  for  the  chief  element  of 
patriotism  we  must  keep.  "  What  is  that  element  ?  "  you 
ask.  It  is  the  willingness  of  the  individual  to  sacrifice 
his  welfare  for  the  welfare  of  the  group.  There  we  have 
the  stem  of  the  world-spirit  of  to-morrow.  But  the  blos- 
som will  not  burst  forth  in  a  night.  It  must  come  by  an 
unfolding  and  a  growth.  We  cannot  climb  to  universal 
peace  upon  a  golden  ladder  and  cut  the  rungs  beneath 
us.  Evolution  builds  on  the  past.  The  final  spirit  of 
"  worldism  "  will  be  a  broadening  and  a  deepening  and 
a  humanizing  of  the  spirit  of  sacrifice  which  is  the 
noblest  element  in  our  patriotism. 

"  But,"  you  ask,  "  if  the  evolution  of  patriotism  is  in- 
evitable, what  have  we  to  do  with  it  ?  Why  should  we 
meddle  with  the  course  of  nature  ?  "  We  reply  that  the 
evolution  must  come  through  you.  We  are  not  "  puppets 
jerked  by  unseen  wires."  "  Consciousness,"  says  Bergson, 
"  is  essentially  free."  Man  the  savage  or  man  the  philos- 
opher —  he  alone  can  decide.  Let  him  purify  patriotism 
with  Christianity  and  he  has  brotherhood ;  adulterate  it 
with  avarice  and  he  has  war.  The  evolution  of  patriotism 
is  not  a  physical  thing.  Listen  to  Huxley,  "  Social  prog- 
ress means  a  checking  of  the  cosmic  process  at  every 
step  and  the  substitution  for  it  of  the  ethical  process." 
The  evolution  of  patriotism,  then,  is  a  moral  thing,  and 


98  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

morality  is  man-made.  We  are  men,  but  we  can  be  super- 
men. We  are  patriots  of  a  nation.  We  can  be  patriots 
of  the  world. 

The  evolution  of  patriotism  is  no  theorist's  dream.  It 
is  a  palpable  fact.  The  patriot  of  one  age  may  be  the 
scoundrel  of  the  next.  A  turn  of  the  kaleidoscope  and 
Paul  the  convict  trades  places  with  Nero  the  Emperor. 
Who  was  the  ideal  ancient  patriot  ?  The  statesman, 
Pericles  ?  The  thinker,  Plato  ?  No.  The  most  efficient 
murderer,  a  Macedonian  boy.  "  I  must  civilize,"  he  says. 
So  he  starts  into  his  neighbor's  country  with  forty  thou- 
sand fighters  at  his  back.  Does  Persia  yield  its  banner  ? 
No.  Then  crush  it.  Does  Thebes  resist  ?  Then  burn 
it  to  the  ground.  Do  the  women  prate  of  freedom  ?  Load 
them  with  slave  chains.  What  ?  Do  they  still  hold  out  ? 
Then  slaughter  the  swine.  And  as  men  watch  him  wad- 
ing through  seas  of  blood,  riding  roughshod  over  pros- 
trate lives  and  dead  hopes  and  shattered  empires,  the 
blind  age  cries  out,  "  O  godlike  Alexander ! " 

"  Godlike  !  "  Oh,  but  there 's  new  meaning  in  that  word 
to-day.  How  much  nobler  a  picture  our  modern  patriot 
presents !  Not  waving  the  brand  of  destruction,  not  a 
king  of  murder  will  you  find  the  great  patriot  of  to-day. 
His  thunderbolt  of  conquest  was  a  host  of  righteousness. 
His  empire  was  built  in  the  hearts  of  men.  In  the  teem- 
ing slums  of  the  world's  greatest  city  he  lifted  the  stand- 
ard of  the  Christ.  Haggard  children  stre,tched  out  hands 
for  bread.  He  fed  them  with  his  last  crust.  Thousands 
were  dying  in  the  city's  filth.  He  pointed  them  to  a  more 
Beautiful  City  where  pain  should  be  no  more.  And  when 
the  body  of  William  Booth  was  borne  through  the  silent 
throngs  of  London  streets,  a  million  heads  were  bowed 


THE  EVOLUTION  OF  PATRIOTISM  99 

in  reverence  to  this  patriot  of  a  purer  day.    In  every 
hamlet  of  civilization  some  heart  called  him  godlike. 

Is  not  the  trend  of  patriotism  clear  ?  Are  not  the 
seeds  of  a  new  world-loyalty  already  in  our  soil  ?  The 
trumpet  call  to  war  can  never  rouse  this  newer  patriotism. 
The  summons  "  peace  on  earth  and  good  will  to  men  " 
that  is  the  future  bugle  call.  And  for  us  the  task  is  clear. 
To  take  our  destiny  into  our  own  hands,  to  throw  off  the 
prejudices  of  nationalism,  to  turn  our  faces  resolutely  to 
the  future  and  strive  for  that  summit  of  brotherhood  and 
universal  peace,  that 

"  One  far-off  divine  event 
To  which  the  whole  creation  moves." 


CERTAIN  PHASES  OF  THE  PEACE 
MOVEMENT 

By  CALVERT  MAGRUDER,  St.  John's  College,  Annapolis, 
Maryland 

First  Prize  Oration  in  the  Eastern  Group  Contest,  1913,  and  Second 
Prize  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  Mohonk  Lake,  May  15,  1913 


CERTAIN  PHASES  OF  THE  PEACE 
MOVEMENT'       '"  • 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen : 

We  are  gathered  here  this  evening  in  the  confident 
expectation  that  a  rule  of  reason  will  soon  be  established 
among  the  nations.  It  has  been  a  hard,  at  times  almost  a 
discouraging,  fight  —  for  it  is  difficult  to  convince  the 
world  of  its  own  insanity,  and  lovers  of  peace  have 
often  been  tempted  to  cry  in  their  despair,  "  How  long, 
O  Lord,  how  long  ?  " 

But  there  have  always  been  men,  with  vision  unaffected 
by  martial  glamour,  who  have  foreseen  in  the  logic  of  the 
world's  history  the  inevitable  end  of  war,  and  we  have 
progressed  now  to  a  point  where  peace  is  the  normal 
condition  in  international  relationships.  But  it  is  an 
armed  peace,  founded  on  the  false  principle  of  suspicion 
and  distrust,  and  we  come  now  to  consider  the  practical 
question  of  what  the  third  Hague  Conference  can  do  to 
establish  peace  upon  a  firm  and  enduring  foundation. 

You  will  remember  that  the  First  Hague  Conference 
established  a  so-called  Permanent  Court  of  Arbitration. 
It  is  not  a  definite,  tangible  tribunal,  but  merely  a  panel 
of  a  hundred  or  more  men  from  whom  the  arbiters  in 
each  specific  case  may  be  selected ;  and  therefore,  though 
it  is  a  great  step  in  the  right  direction  and  though  it  has 
accomplished  some  good  work,  it  has  not  commanded  full 
confidence  and  recognition.  To  supplement  this  court 

103 


104  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

the  Conference  of  1907  proposed  a  new  organization  — 
a  Judicial  Court  of  Arbitration,  to  be  composed  of  seven- 
teen judges  of  recognized  legal  authority,  to  sit  for  terms 
of  twelve  yours,  and  to  be  competent  to  decide  all  cases. 
U-.  iv,  ilu-n,  is  tli.'  nucleus  of  an  easily  accessible  supreme 
court  of  the  world,  whose  decisions  would  soon  build 
up  a  new  system  of  international  law.  Its  composition, 
jurisdiction,  and  procedure  are  agreed  upon.  The  vital 
problem,  a  mode  of  selecting  the  judges,  remains  un- 
settled. Evidently,  then,  the  first  great  duty  of  the  next 
Hague  Conference  is  to  put  into  operation  this  court,  of 
which  all  the  nations  recognize  the  need  and  desirability. 
Following  logically  the  establishment  of  competent 
machinery  for  arbitration  comes  the  second  great  duty 
of  that  conference  —  the  passage  of  a  convention  bind- 
ing the  nations  to  resort  to  this  court  in  all  cases  that 
fail  of  ordinary  diplomatic  settlement.  The  Judicial 
Court  of  Arbitration,  if  the  nations  are  not  bound  to  use 
it,  would  certainly  fail  of  its  purpose.  A  general  treaty 
making  arbitration  obligatory  is  not  too  much  to  demand, 
for  the  Conference  of  1907  declared  itself  unanimous 
"  in  recognizing  the  principle  of  compulsory  arbitration." 
Separate  arbitration  treaties  mounting  into  the  hundreds 
have  been  negotiated  between  individual  nations,  but 
almost  all  contain  that  fatal  reservation  of  questions  of 
"  honor  and  vital  interests."  Honor  and  vital  interests  — 
could  any  words  be  more  vague  and  indefinite  ?  Are 
these  riot  the  very  cases  which  interested  nations  are 
least  competent  to  decide  ?  A  complete  answer  to  that 
silly  reservation  is  found  in  our  hundred  years'  peace 
with  Great  Britain.  As  John  W.  Foster,  that  keen  stu- 
dent of  our  diplomatic  history,  has  said,  "  The  United 


CERTAIN  PHASES  OF  THE  PEACE  MOVEMENT  105 

States  can  have  no  future  dispute  with  England  more 
seriously  involving  the  territorial  integrity,  the  honor  of 
the  nation,  its  vital  interests,  or  its  independence,  than 
those  questions  which  have  already  been  submitted  to 
arbitration."  Denmark  has  agreed  with  Italy  and  the 
Netherlands  to  arbitrate  all  questions  that  fail  of  diplo- 
matic settlement,  thus  insuring  perpetual  peace  between 
those  nations.  Here  indeed  is  the  pathway  of  true 
national  honor. 

Coincident  with  the  establishment  of  the  legal  machin- 
ery for  arbitration  and  the  growth  thereof,  we  would 
naturally  have  expected  a  cessation  in  the  mad  race  for 
armament-supremacy.  But  the  very  reverse  has  happened, 
and  to  deal  firmly  with  this  contradictory  situation  is  the 
third  great  duty  of  the  next  Hague  Conference.  Of  what 
avail  are  our  Courts  of  Arbitral  Justice  when  this  intol- 
erable economic  waste  is  permitted !  To  limit  armaments 
was  the  avowed  purpose  of  the  First  Hague  Conference, 
but  nothing  was  accomplished  save  the  adoption  of  a 
neatly  worded  resolution  that  the  limitation  aforesaid 
is  "  highly  desirable  for  the  enlargement  of  the  material 
and  moral  well-being  of  humanity."  In  1907  the  subject 
was  again  under  discussion,  the  nations  exhorted  to  a 
serious  examination  of  the  question  —  and  there  the  mat- 
ter rested.  We  have  reached  now  an  insufferable  stage 
where  effective  action  must  be  taken.  Let  us  hear  no  more 
that  deceptive  catch  phrase,  "  If  you  want  peace  prepare 
for  war."  When  bad  blood  is  likely  to  arise  between 
individuals  the  very  worst  policy  to  pursue  is  to  furnish 
them  with  weapons.  And  so  it  is  with  nations.  Consider, 
if  you  will,  the  neck-and-neck  race  between  Great  Britain 
and  the  German  Empire  in  the  construction  of  battleships. 


106  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

What  fool  will  call  that  preparation  for  war  a  guaranty 
of  peace  ?  We  might  be  disposed  to  admit  the  sincerity 
of  those  who  say  we  must  arm  and  ever  arm  to  maintain 
peace,  except  that  they  are  too  often  men  with  profes- 
sional and  business  interests  at  stake.  In  England  there 
have  been  amazing  revelations  of  this  sinister  condition 
—  armament  companies  with  peers,  members  of  Parlia- 
ment, newspaper  owners,  officers  of  the  army  and  navy, 
as  stockholders ;  enormous  appropriations  forced  through 
Parliament  by  interested  parties ;  periodic  war  scares  in 
newspapers  inspired  by  armament  syndicates.  Only  re- 
cently we  read  how  the  great  Krupp  firm  of  Germany  had 
been  exposed  in  its  practice  of  bribing  officials  to  obtain 
valuable  military  information  and  furnishing  French 
newspapers  with  war-scare  articles  calculated  to  induce 
Germany  to  increase  her  armament  orders.  In  Russia 
and  France  they  face  a  similar  state  of  affairs.  Here  in 
the  United  States  we  are  undoubtedly  not  free  therefrom. 
And  then  there  are  the  navy  leagues  in  every  country, 
playing  upon  the  fears  of  the  nations  by  startling  tales 
of  what  the  others  are  doing,  and  so  on  through  an  end- 
less chain,  manufacturing  a  demand  for  battleships  in 
the  name  and  under  the  guise  of  patriotism.  We  shrink 
from  the  contemplation  of  such  greed  and  selfishness, 
and  appeal  for  relief  to  the  third  Hague  Conference. 

We  come  now  to  a  consideration  of  the  fourth  prime 
duty  devolving  upon  that  conference.  Ocean  commerce 
in  war  should  be  rendered  inviolable.  In  effecting  this 
we  not  only  abolish  a  barbarous  custom,  but  at  the 
same  time  remove  one  of  the  chief  causes  of  great 
navies.  As  long  as  the  safety  of  the  merchant  marine 
is  not  guaranteed  by  international  agreement,  just  so 


CERTAIN  PHASES  OF  THE  PEACE  MOVEMENT  107 

long  will  nations  with  commercial  aspirations  build  enor- 
mous navies  for  their  protection.  It  is  true  England  has 
hitherto  opposed  this  reform,  —  confident  in  her  naval 
supremacy,  —  but  she  cannot  again  fly  in  the  face  of  a 
general  demand  without  too  great  a  sacrifice  of  prestige. 

Here,  then,  are  four  important  problems  of  the  peace 
movement,  all  difficult,  but  not  impossible  of  solution 
when  we  remember  that  the  Conference  of  1907,  in  good 
faith,  I  believe,  adopted  the  following  declaration,  "That, 
by  working  together  during  the  past  four  months,  the 
collected  powers  not  only  have  learnt  to  understand 
one  another  and  to  draw  close  together,  but  have  suc- 
ceeded ...  in  evolving  a  very  lofty  conception  of  the 
common  welfare  of  humanity."  Whether  these  fine 
words  breathe  sincerity  or  hypocrisy  the  next  Hague 
Conference  has  ample  opportunity  to  prove. 

And  now,  what  shall  we  say  of  the  position  of 
America  in  this  war  against  war?  Her  boundless  re- 
sources ;  her  amalgamation  of  men  from  all  parts  of  the 
world  into  one  people;  her  impregnable  geographical 
situation ;  her  embodiment  of  the  three  cardinal  princi- 
ples of  world-union  (federation,  interstate  free  trade, 
interstate  courts);  the  genius  and  ideals  of  our  govern- 
ment—  all  give  America  a  logical  leadership.  She  can 
boast  of  the  first  peace  society  in  the  world,  of  a  glo- 
rious record  of  arbitration,  of  a  long  list  of  the  wisest 
international  statesmen,  of  a  most  advanced  position  at 
The  Hague  upon  the  questions  of  ocean  commerce, 
courts  of  justice,  arbitration,  limitation  of  armaments. 
But  there  is  the  darker  view.  The  treaties  negotiated 
by  Secretary  Knox  with  France  and  with  England,  agree- 
ing to  arbitrate  every  question  that  fails  of  diplomatic 


108  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

settlement  —  those  treaties  were  rejected  by  the  United 
States  Senate.  There  was  a  transcendent  opportunity 
to  lay  the  foundation  for  a  speedy  realization  of  peace 
universal,  with  France  and  England  willing,  yes,  even 
anxious  to  cooperate  —  and  America  failed !  Mr.  Taft 
has  shown  that  if  the  position  of  the  Senate  is  ac- 
cepted as  international  law,  then  we  may  as  well  bid 
farewell  to  any  hopes  of  leadership  in  the  peace  move- 
ment, for  our  nation  could  then  enter  upon  no  gen- 
eral arbitration  agreements  because  of  the  prerogative 
of  the  Senate  in  each  specific  case  to  accept  or  refuse 
arbitration. 

It  is  at  this  point,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen,  that  there  is 
work  for  the  humblest  of  us  to  do.  In  the  intellectual 
field  we  can  aid  in  the  creation  of  an  intelligent,  forceful 
public  opinion  that  will  induce  the  Senate  to  recede  from 
its  fatal  attitude,  and  that  will  resist  a  false,  cheap  patri- 
otism which  is  relentlessly  endeavoring  to  crush  America 
'neath  the  burden  of  militarism.  Then  in  the  moral  field 
we  can  stimulate  and  foster  a  peaceful  attitude,  a  senti- 
ment for  peace,  in  the  hearts  of  our  countrymen;  and 
until  this  is  accomplished  there  can  be  no  peace  universal, 
for,  as  Senator  Root  has  said,  "  The  questions  at  issue 
between  disputing  nations  are  nothing,  the  spirit  that 
deals  with  them  is  everything."  And  finally,  in  the 
educational  field,  let  us  take  heed  that  the  men  and 
women  of  our  rising  generation  are  taught  the  glorious 
pages  of  our  arbitration  history  as  well  as  they  know 
the  battles  of  our  country.  Let  us  take  care  that  it  is 
grounded  into  their  minds  and  habits  of  thought  from 
earliest  years,  that  "  peace  hath  her  victories  no  less 
renowned  than  war." 


CERTAIN  PHASES  OF  THE  PEACE  MOVEMENT  109 

In  conclusion,  let  us  not  be  deceived  by  that  vain 
apology  for  war,  that  it  is  necessary  to  keep  alive  the 
heroic  spirit  and  to  stimulate  manly  courage.  Despite 
the  noble  side  in  war,  its  bestial  side  predominates ;  its 
larger  effect  upon  men  is  demoralizing.  And  if  it  be 
glorious  to  die  for  a  cause,  how  much  nobler  to  live  and 
strive  for  an  ideal,  utilizing  the  talents  that  God  gave 
us  for  its  realization !  The  movement  for  peace  is  not 
one  of  weaklings  and  mollycoddles.  It  is  championed 
by  red-blooded  men,  daring  to  bear  the  ridicule  of  the 
thoughtless  and  to  fight  for  the  preconceptions  of  hu- 
manity. Peace  has  her  heroes  in  daily  life  —  miners, 
mariners,  policemen,  firemen,  men  of  every  station,  dis- 
playing the  nobility  of  their  souls  often  unheralded  and 
unsung.  The  venerable  William  T.  Stead,  bearing  across 
the  ocean  his  message  of  international  good  will,  sacrificed 
his  life  on  the  Titanic  that  others  might  live.  He  was 
a  hero,  yes,. but  a  hero  of  peace. 

It  would  be  an  insult  to  your  intelligence  to  prove  the 
self-evident  proposition  that  war  is  uneconomic,  unscien- 
tific, unchristian.  The  movement  for  its  elimination, 
above  all,  is  logical  and  practical,  and  should  appeal  to 
every  man.  Is  it  nothing  to  you  ?  Yes,  it  is  a  great 
deal  to  you.  Merely  let  your  imaginations  picture  the 
day  when  the  seventy  per  cent  of  our  national  revenue 
now  sacrificed  on  the  altar  of  folly  is  diverted  to  the  arts 
of  peace,  to  the  amelioration  of  social  conditions,  to  ad- 
vancing the  happiness  of  our  people  —  at  peace  with  all 
other  peoples  in  the  assurance  of  international  law  and 
love.  Ladies  and  Gentlemen,  if  we  but  do  our  duty,  the 
dawn  of  that  great  day  will  come  in  our  generation ! 


THE  ASSURANCE  OF  PEACE 

By  VERNON  M.  WELSH,  Knox  College,  Galesburg,  Illinois 

First  Prize  Oration  in  the  Western  Group  Contest,  1913,  and  Third 
Prize  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  Mohonk  Lake,  May  15,  1913 


THE  ASSURANCE  OF  PEACE 

The  birth  and  rapid  rise  of  the  present  movement  for 
international  peace  are  events  of  recent  years.  The  nine- 
teenth century  found  its  welcome  in  the  smoking  cannon 
and  crimsoned  fields  of  Hohenlinden.  At  its  close  the 
first  great  peace  conference  of  The  Hague  was  in  session. 
One  hundred  years  ago  Napoleon  was  sweeping  across 
Europe  in  his  terrible  attempt  to  create  an  empire.  To-day 
France,  England,  and  America  have  agreed  on  treaties 
that  declare  for  unbroken  peace.  Touched  by  the  wand 
of  progress,  the  Utopian  ideal  of  yesterday  has  become 
the  dominant  political  issue  of  to-day.  It  is  pertinent, 
then,  that  we  seek  the  true  nature  of  this  revolution. 
Is  it  borne  on  the  crest  of  a  popular  impulse  that  will 
recede  as  rapidly  as  it  has  risen,  or  is  it  a  permanent 
movement,  the  product  of  natural  forces  working  through 
ordinary  channels  ? 

The  nineteenth  century  represents  a  break  with  the 
past.  Swept  into  the  mighty  current  of  transition,  the 
habits  and  customs  of  a  thousand  years  have  disappeared. 
With  the  development  of  natural  resources,  the  establish- 
ment and  growth  of  the  factory  system,  the  use  of  means 
of  rapid  communication,  nations  have  entered  upon  a  new 
era.  Commerce  and  industry  have  come  to  dominate 
thought  and  action  and  are  transforming  the  very  life 
of  the  world.  Defying  the  rigorous  climate  of  both  the 
poles,  trade  has  penetrated  the  frozen  recesses  of  Hudson 

113 


114  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

Bay  and  made  of  the  Falkland  Islands  a  relay  station  in 
the  progress  of  victorious  industry.  Nor  is  the  equatorial 
heat  more  discouraging.  The  thick  jungles  of  Africa 
have  yielded  their  secrets,  and  the  muddy  waters  of  the 
Amazon  are  churned  by  propellers  a  thousand  miles 
from  the  sea.  International  trade  routes  traverse  the 
seas,  connecting  continent  with  continent.  In  forty 
years  this  commerce  has  increased  from  two  billions 
to  thirty  billions.  Giant  corporations  have  ignored  po- 
litical boundaries,  carried  trade  wherever  profitable, 
and  are  supplying  the  varied  demands  of  entire  com- 
munities. Tariff  walls,  but  lately  effective  barriers,  are 
crumbling  before  the  onslaught  of  trade.  Nations  are 
no  longer  independent.  The  wheat  from  Canada  and 
the  Dakotas  feeds  the  mill  workers  of  Sheffield  and  the 
nobility  of  Berlin.  The  failure  of  the  Georgia  cotton 
crop  halts  the  looms  of  England  and  raises  the  cost  of 
living  throughout  Europe.  Nations  can  no  longer  exist 
as  self-sufficient  economic  units.  Never  before  were  they 
so  mutually  interdependent.  Never  before  has  the  wel- 
fare and  security  of  one  state  depended  upon  the  enter- 
prise and  diligence  of  another.  And  the  movement  for 
international  peace  is  the  chance  offspring  of  these  new 
social  forces,  at  once  a  protest  and  a  warning  against 
the  wrecking  of  modern  economic  structures  by  the 
ruthless  hand  of  war. 

Commerce,  the  most  important  of  these  new  forces, 
flourishes  unprejudiced  by  armaments  and  military  pres- 
tige. In  the  open  competition  of  the  world's  markets 
stronger  powers  meet  and  suffer  from  the  rivalry  of 
states  that  have  no  military  standing.  Relative  to  popu- 
lation, Norway  has  a  carrying  trade  three  times  as  great 


THE  ASSURANCE  OF  PEACE  115 

as  England's.  With  her  million  trained  warriors  Ger- 
many is  beaten  by  the  merchants  of  Holland.  The  flag 
of  little  Denmark  flies  at  more  mastheads  than  does  the 
Stars  and  Stripes.  Where  then  is  the  commercial  ad- 
vantage supposed  to  attend  superior  military  strength  ? 
But  it  is  to  prevent  the  seizure  of  its  commerce  by  others 
that  nations  must  empty  their  treasuries  to  keep  iron- 
clads afloat.  Yet  what  could  be  gained  by  attempted 
confiscation  ?  If  Germany  annihilated  England's  navy 
to-morrow,  how  would  she  profit  ?  Commerce  is  a  proc- 
ess of  exchange,  the  continuance  and  promotion  of 
which  is  dependent  upon  the  degree  of  mutual  profit. 
Commercial  gain  is  not  a  consequent  of  military  success. 
It  is  since  England  seized  the  gold  fields,  diamond  mines, 
and  fertile  plateaus  of  lower  Africa  that  British  securities 
have  dropped  twenty  points.  In  1871  Germany  humbled 
and  humiliated  France  almost  beyond  toleration,  yet  her 
share  of  the  world's  commerce  has  not  been  augmented 
thereby.  So  would  it  be  with  England.  True,  Germany 
might  commit  some  depredations  and  hinder  the  passage 
of  trade,  but  what  would  be  her  motive  ?  How  could 
she  gain  ?  Even  if  the  British  Isles  were  depopulated, 
it  is  doubtful  whether  Germany  would  benefit.  For  by 
what  miracle  would  Germany  be  able  to  develop  the 
facilities,  the  shipyards,  mills,  factories,  foundries,  mines 
and  machinery,  to  supply  the  trade  which  the  foremost 
of  commercial  nations  has  been  generations  in  building 
up  ?  Germany's  banner  might  wave  over  the  Bank  of 
England,  her  excise  boats  police  the  Thames  and  the 
Clyde,  yet  she  would  behold  the  trade  of  a  conquered 
province  going  to  foreign  nations.  Trade  does  not  follow 
the  flag.  Undisturbed  by  political  changes  or  military 


116  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

reverses,  it  flows  in  constantly  widening  channels  wher- 
ever productive  fields  are  found. 

And  in  the  waging  of  war,  do  we  reckon  the  direct 
cost  to  commerce  ?  The  commercial  relations  of  the 
entire  world  are  disturbed.  Prolonged  conflict  is  accom- 
panied by  the  closing  of  the  bank  .and  the  factory,  the 
dismantling  of  the  shop  and  mill,  and  the  lengthening 
of  the  bread  line  in  every  city  and  town.  In  what  state 
of  prosperity  and  happiness  might  not  France  have  been 
had  Napoleon  never  lived  ?  With  half  a  century  gone, 
our  own  country  is  still  suffering  from  the  devastation 
of  the  Civil  War.  Our  commerce  with  South  America 
is  scarcely  beyond  the  point  it  had  reached  before  our 
week-end  tiff  with  Spain.  Yet  there  are  those  who  prate 
of  national  honor  and  of  war  as  insuring  prosperity. 
From  the  leader  of  a  newborn  national  party  we  hear 
that  without  a  periodic  war  America  would  become  ef- 
feminate and  weak,  her  aggressive  commercial  life  timid 
and  corrupt,  and  within  a  few  brief  years  the  great  Re- 
public would  sink  to  a  fourth-rate  power.  Up,  brave 
Americans,  and  man  the  guns  !  Awake,  sons  of  freedom, 
and  sweep  the  seas !  Fourteen  years  without  a  war ;  our 
beloved  land  is  ruined.  You  men  of  the  factory  and  mill, 
you  men  of  property  and  business,  you  producers  of  the 
nation's  wealth,  forward  into  the  carnage ;  burn  the 
homes  of  thrift  and  industry,  for  commerce  will  be  en- 
riched thereby ;  ravage  the  fields  and  despoil  the  cities, 
for  this  will  insure  vigorous  national  life ;  impoverish 
happy  peoples,  spread  famine  and  pestilence  through 
fertile  valleys,  mark  the  sites  of  contented  villages  with 
smoldering  ruins,  defy  your  Christian  God,  and  kindle 
the  fires  of  hell  in  human  breasts;  commit  violence, 


THE  ASSURANCE  OF  PEACE  117 

treachery,  rapine,  ay,  murder,  —  for  the  eternal  glory 
of  the  Stars  and  Stripes.  Yet  commerce  and  industry— 
the  glittering  prizes  which  every  nation  corvets  when  it 
builds  a  dreadnought  or  enlarges  its  army —  demand  that 
the  creative  forces  of  peace  supplant  the  destructive 
wastes  of  war. 

To-day  the  financial  relationships  of  nations  are  inex- 
tricably entangled.  The  big  banks  in  the  capitals  of  the 
world  are  in  communication  with  each  other  every  second 
of  the  day.  During  the  American  crisis  in  1907  the  bank 
rate  in  England  went  up  to  seven  per  cent,  forcing  many 
British  concerns  to  suspend  operations.  Because  of  the 
Balkan  War  the  bank  rate  in  Berlin,  Paris,  and  Vienna 
is  the  highest  in  twenty  years,  and  European  securities 
have  depreciated  over  six  billion  dollars.  Foreign  invest- 
ments are  raising  insuperable  barriers  to  war.  Should 
the  French  bombard  Hamburg  to-day  they  would  destroy 
the  property  of  Frenchmen.  Let  Emperor  William  cap- 
ture London,  loot  the  Bank  of  England,  and  he  will 
return  to  find  German  industry  paralyzed,  the  banks 
closed,  and  a  panic  sweeping  the  land.  Let  English 
regiments  again  move  to  invade  the  United  States, 
English  warships  draw  up  in  battle  line  to  attack  our 
seaports,  and  four  billions  of  the  earnings  of  the  Eng- 
lish people  would  bar  the  way.  To  the  victor  of  the 
present  the  spoils  of  war  are  valueless.  Japan,  victor 
over  the  great  Russian  Empire,  staggers  under  a  colos- 
sal debt.  The  Italian  government  hears  rumbles  of 
discontent,  because  the  cost  of  winning  a  victory  has 
been  too  great.  What  better  proof  do  we  need  that 
war  is  profitless,  that  it  means  financial  suicide?  It 
has  been  transformed  from  a  gainful  occupation  into 


118  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

economic  folly,  and  war  will  cease  because  the  price 
is  becoming  prohibitive. 

In  this  movement  for  peace,  capital's  strongest  ally 
is  her  most  active  enemy.  Raised  to  a  position  of  inde- 
pendence and  power  by  the  Industrial  Revolution,  labor 
is  wielding  an  effective  influence.  The  complexity  of 
modern  business  has  aroused  workingmen  in  every 
country  to  a  common  interest  and  sympathy.  The 
International  Congress  of  Trade  Unions,  represeSting 
twenty  countries  and  over  ten  million  men,  has  declared 
for  universal  disarmament.  Just  last  month  eighty-five 
thousand  coal  miners  in  Illinois  resolved  that  if  the 
United  States  declared  war  on  a  foreign  power,  they 
would  call  a  general  strike. 

And  why  not  ?  Why  should  the  workingmen  of  one 
country  offer  themselves  as  targets  for  those  of  another? 
Why  should  the  workers  of  Germany  be  taxed  to  sup- 
port a  war  against  England,  Germany's  best  market  ? 
Can  the  rice  growers  of  Japan  profit  by  killing  Ameri- 
cans to  whom  they  sell  their  produce?  War  means 
suffering  and  want,  and  the  laborer  has  come  to  know 
it.  He  is  cold  to  the  sight  of  its  flaunting  flags  and  the 
sound  of  its  grand,  wild  music,  for  he  sees  the  larder 
bare,  funds  exhausted,  and  hunger  at  the  door.  He  re- 
fuses to  sacrifice  his  body  and  the  welfare  of  his  family 
upon  the  altar  of  Mars.  No  longer  can  kings  and  em- 
perors satisfy  their  grasping  ambitions.  Armed  by  the 
ballot,  the  masses  are  to-day  supreme.  Never  again  will 
the  cruel  hand  of  tyranny  press  to  their  lips  the  poisoned 
cup  of  death.  Their  sway  is  absolute.  The  destinies  of 
nations  are  in  their  keeping.  The  decree  has  gone  forth 
that  war  must  cease. 


THE  ASSURANCE  OF  PEACE  119 

Born  of  these  greater  movements,  a  host  of  influences 
bring  nearer  the  dawn  of  peace.  The  express  and  the 
wireless  have  supplanted  the  oxcart  and  the  courier. 
Chicago  and  Boston  are  closer  to-day  than  New  York 
and  Albany  a  century  ago.  Within  the  hour  of  their 
occurrence  events  that  happen  in  Paris  are  published  in 
Chicago  and  St.  Louis.  Political  boundaries  are  fading 
before  larger  interests.  Every  railroad  train  crossing  the 
frontier,  every  ship  plying  the  seas,  every  article  of 
commerce,  every  exchange  of  business,  every  cable  con- 
veying news  from  distant  lands  —  all  these  are  potent 
factors  in  the  cause  of  international  peace.  Add  to 
these  the  conciliating  influence  of  foreign  investments, 
the  telephone  and  telegraph,  travel,  education,  democ- 
racy, religion,  and  you  have  marshaled  a  host  for  peace 
whose  clarion  trumpets  shall  never  sound  retreat.  Cast- 
ing aside  the  prejudice  of  ages,  modern  industrialism 
flings  around  the  world  the  economic  bonds  against 
which  the  forces  of  militarism  are  powerless. 

Here,  then,  in  the  world-wide  operations  of  commerce 
and  industry  is  the  assurance  of  peace.  The  skeptic  may 
scoff  and  the  cynic  point  to  Mexico  and  the  Balkans, 
but  the  Industrial  Revolution  has  produced  a  multitude 
of  influences  that  are  knitting  the  nations  into  an  indis- 
soluble unity.  Men  are  beginning  to  realize  the  integrity 
of  mankind,  and  a  world-consciousness  is  arising.  Kind- 
ness and  justice — yesterday  but  community  ideals — are 
extending  their  sway  throughout  the  earth.  Even  while 
bayonets  are  bared  in  conflict  and  cannon  thunder  against 
hostile  camps,  the  magic  of  our  civilization  is  weaving 
bonds  of  union  that  cannot  be  broken.  Peace,  not  war, 
is  the  true  grandeur  of  nations;  love,  not  hate,  is  the 


120  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

immutable  law  of  God ;  and  so  surely  as  governments 
and  kings  are  powerless  to  divide  when  home  and  fac- 
tory would  bind,  some  not  too  distant  day  will  find  the 
battle  flags  all  furled,  the  sword's  arbitrament  abandoned, 
and  the  world  at  peace. 


EDUCATION  FOR  PEACE 

By  FRANCIS  J.  LYONS,  University  of  Texas,  Austin,  Texas, 
representing  the  Southern  Group 

First  Prize  Oration  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  Mohonk  Lake, 
May  28,  1914 


EDUCATION  FOR  PEACE 

Time  was  when  war  was  beneficial.  Historians  have 
justified  the  spread  of  knowledge  by  the  sword.  At  the 
world's  awakening,  it  was  well  that  the  new  thought 
should  be  diffused  even  at  the  sacrifice  of  human  blood. 
It  was  justified  because  there  was  no  other  means.  We 
have  to  cast  our  imagination  back  through  the  centuries 
and  realize  that  then  there  were  no  railroads,  no  tele- 
graph, no  newspapers ;  that  man  was  bound  by  narrow 
limits ;  and  the  elemental  processes  of  the  world  were 
undiscovered.  We  do  not  criticize  Alexander  for  con- 
quering the  eastern  perils,  for  he  carried  in  his  phalanxes 
the  spirit  of  new-discovered  thought.  We  do  not  de- 
nounce Rome  for  piercing  the  unknown  realms  with  her 
legions,  for  she  was  the  mother  of  a  new  belief.  But 
this  was  at  the  dawn  of  history,  when  erudition  was  in 
its  struggling  embryo,  and  the  physical  was  the  better 
part  of  man.  Man  went  forth  to  battle  as  a  religion. 

The  world  grew  partly  wise,  and  man  preached  the 
gospel  of  brotherhood.  But  it  did  not  last.  The  chang- 
ing of  the  peoples  smoldered  the  fires  of  rising  intelli- 
gence, and  the  world  rolled  back  again  in  darkness  - 
a  darkness  long  and  black.  Centuries  passed,  and  a  new 
light  came,  slowly  but  courageously.  Man  blinkingly 
came  forth,  dazed  and  unsteady.  The  light  grew,  and 
man  grew  with  it ;  but  rooted  deep  in  his  heart  was  the 
love  of  war  of  his  ancestors.  In  a  different  spirit,  it  is 

123 


124  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

true ;  but  it  was  there,  and  be  went  forth  to  battle  not 
because  it  was  religion,  but  because  it  was  brave. 

The  world  rolled  on ;  war  grew ;  it  developed  with 
the  state  ;  it  became  an  art ;  was  studied  —  and  now  our 
cycle  turns.  It  faces  us  as  a  custom  backed  up  by  the 
centuries  —  deep-rooted,  a  consumer  that  yields  no  re- 
turns and,  what  with  our  modern  appliances,  a  terror 
to  the  hearts  of  all  the  world.  Men  fought  in  the  early 
ages  because  they  thought  it  was  just;  men  fought  in 
the  Middle  Ages  because  they  considered  it  brave  ;  men 
of  our  modern  age  will  banish  war  because  it  is  a 
fallacy. 

Do  you  know  that  to  maintain  our  so-called  prestige  we 
spend  seventy  per  cent  of  our  national  income  ?  Think 
of  it !  Seventy  per  cent  to  maintain  our  present  status 
and  to  prepare  for  the  future !  Think  of  that  awful 
drain ;  think,  if  applied  in  other  channels,  what  good 
could  be  done !  We  are  proud  of  our  battleship  Texas. 
She  is  a  noble  war  dog;  yet  do  you  realize  that  if  we 
had  applied  the  money  spent  on  her  in  our  own  state 
we  could  have  had  one  gigantic  paved  highway  twice 
the  distance  from  El  Paso  to  Galveston  ?  We  could  have 
had  two  hundred  high  schools,  representing  $75,000  each. 
We  could  have  raised  our  institutions  of  higher  learning 
to  a  level  with  any  of  the  East  or  North.  Fifteen  mil- 
lions gone  for  a  floating  war  machine  which  in  twenty 
years  will  be  a  piece  of  rusted,  useless  iron ;  fifteen  mil- 
lions for  a  sailing  dragon  who,  each  time  one  of  her  big 
guns  speaks,  wastes  the  equivalent  of  a  four-year  college 
education  for  some  youth — $1700  —  for  a  single  shot. 
Our  war  dogs  sail  the  seas ;  our  soldiers  parade  our 
forts ;  and  we  look  on  and  raise  a  joyous  hubbub  as  the 


EDUCATION  FOR  PEACE  125 

nations  of  the  world  rush  madly  on,  wasting  themselves 
in  the  race  for  military  supremacy. 

Have  you  ever  considered  yourself  transported  to  some 
celestial  height,  and  there,  from  the  regions  of  the  infinite, 
allowed  to  view  a  battle  on  earth  ?  How  foolish  it  must 
seem,  these  pygmies  coming  forth  to  make  war.  See  them 
as  they  charge  and  wound  and  kill !  See  brother  slay 
brother !  See  the  wounded  left  to  die !  Hear  the  cries 
of  distress,  and  picture  the  grief  that  follows  all !  Men 
battling  to  conquer ;  men  assuming  the  prerogative  of 
a  god  —  how  foolish,  yet  how  serious !  And  these  arti- 
ficial lines  that  men  call  boundaries,  how  punctiliously 
they  are  guarded !  ' '  Take  but  a  hundred  feet,  and  we 
shall  war  with  thee."  How  foolish  this  too  must  seem 
when  viewed  from  above  —  that  we  should  carry  on  war 
over  even  a  slight  infraction  on  any  imaginary,  mathe- 
matical line. 

We  cherish  the  thought  that  the  youth  of  our  land 
are  being  taught  self-restraint.  It  is  ever  impressed  upon 
them  that  there  are  courts  of  justice  for  the  settlement 
of  controversies.  Law  and  order  have  become  stock 
phrases,  dinned  into  their  ears  at  every  turn.  The  man 
who  would  settle  his  difficulty  by  trying  the  physical 
metal  of  his  adversary  is  of  the  past.  By  the  new  order 
he  is  taboo  as  a  savage.  Individual  self-restraint  rings 
out  in  our  vocabulary  as  nationally  descriptive.  The 
babe  at  the  mother's  knee  learns  first  the  virtue  of  it ; 
the  child  at  school  is  tutored  to  it  soundly ;  the  man  in 
life  is  lectured  with  it  regularly.  Brotherhood !  Love ! 
Self-restraint ! 

But  what  of  the  self-restraint  of  the  nation  ?  In  the 
teaching  of  the  individual,  is  it  not  odd  and  inconsistent 


126  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

that  we  forget  the  teaching  of  the  unit  ?  We  paint  the 
inner  rooms  of  our  national  character  with  colors  bright 
and  pleasing,  but  the  exterior,  though  weathering  the 
heavier  storms,  is  forgotten.  If  the  child  be  taught  that 
individuals  should  arbitrate  their  differences,  can  he  not 
learn  that  the  individual  nations  are  subject  to  the  same 
rule  ?  If  arbitration  is  best  for  each  man,  surely  it  must 
be  best  for  all.  If  the  child  be  taught  that  self-restraint 
is  the  boasted  characteristic  of  the  model  American, 
should  he  not  learn  that  the  model  American  nation 
should  be  self -restraining  ?  Let  us  learn  this  lesson,  and 
surely  we  will  never  war.  Herein  shall  we  find  the  solu- 
tion of  this  great  problem.  We  can  preach  about  peace 
and  write  pretty  orations,  but  if  we  are  to  impress  it 
upon  the  hearts  of  the  world,  we  must  teach  it,  and  in 
a  systematic  manner.  It  is  not  to  be  learned  in  a  day. 
It  is  the  labor  of  a  generation  and  more.  It  must  be 
a  fully  developed  characteristic.  Man  is  learning  self- 
development ;  now  we  must  turn  to  the  bigger  ideals  — 
national  restraint,  national  development,  international 
brotherhood. 

Do  you  say  this  is  idealism  —  visionary  ?  On  the 
contrary,  it  is  thoroughly  practicable.  The  only  way  to 
attain  world-peace  is  for  the  individual  citizen  to  think 
peace,  to  teach  peace,  and  to  act  in  accordance  with  such 
thoughts  and  teachings.  Just  as  public  opinion  causes 
war,  so  only  through  cultivated  public  opinion  can  we 
hope  for  peace.  I  do  not  say  to  sink  our  battleships  and 
turn  free  our  army.  I  do  not  argue  that  we  should  quit 
guarding  ourselves  and  throw  ourselves  open  to  the 
world  ;  but  what  I  seek  is  that  we  should  turn  our  faces 
with  bright  hope  to  the  future,  eager  to  assist  in  the 


EDUCATION  FOR  PEACE  127 

abolition  of  all  that  tends  to  war,  eager  to  assist  in  the  only 
proper  way  —  the  enlightenment  of  the  world-nations. 

The  call  comes  naturally  to  America,  the  land  of  new 
belief ;  America,  the  New  World  of  Opportunity,  as 
Emerson  calls  it ;  the  land  cut  off  from  the  conventional 
past ;  a  land  that  has  taken  world-leadership  in  the  march 
of  a  single  century.  To  America,  where  problems  are 
studied  and  fallacies  dethroned,  the  birthplace  and  the 
abiding  home  of  democracy ;  to  America,  the  Christian, 
the  civilized !  What  will  the  answer  be  ?  Already  we 
can  hear  the  faint  responses,  as  yet  vague  and  indistinct, 
the  drowned  murmurings  of  the  wiser  tongues.  These 
must  grow  into  a  national  anthem  whose  echo  will  chal- 
lenge the  powers  of  the  world  and  startle  them  into  the 
consciousness  of  the  new  brotherhood.  We  will  answer : 

"  Yes,  we  have  learned  the  lessons  of  the  centuries  — 
that  war  is  a  fallacy,  and  armed  peace  its  ill-sprung  child ; 
that  man  is  no  longer  savage ;  that  with  enlightened  mind 
he  has  controlled  his  warring  instinct ;  that  human  love 
is  a  mightier  power  than  war;  and  that  we  are  one  in 
the  brotherhood  of  the  Master. 

"  Let  us  stand  before  the  nations,  clad  in  simple  hon- 
esty, panoplied  in  elemental  justice  ;  let  us  appeal  to  the 
common  conscience  of  the  world ;  let  us  say  to  the  war- 
made  powers,  there  is  a  way  out,  and  we  will  lead.  We 
will  help  you  police  the  sea ;  we  will  give  our  constabu- 
lary to  a  quota  of  peace,  but  we  are  through.  No  great 
standing  army,  no  more  leviathan  battleships.  We  trust 
to  what  we  boast  of  as  the  highest  attainment  of  the  age, 
the  innate  justice  of  civilized  humanity." 

To  such  a  national  summons,  how  will  Texas  respond  ? 
Facing  the  Mexican  boundary  for  eight  hundred  miles, 


128  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

Texas  is  to-day  peculiarly  the  guardian  of  our  nation. 
The  situation  calls  not  for  agitation  and  jingoism,  but  for 
rare  patience,  sanity,  and  self-control.  Through  troubled 
waters  our  chosen  captain  is  guiding  the  Ship  of  State. 
It  is  no  time  for  mutiny,  but  rather  a  time  for  obedience. 
In  this  critical  hour  let  every  loyal  citizen  say  with 
a  contemporary  poet: 

In  this  grave  hour  —  God  help  keep  the  President ! 
To  him  all  Lincoln's  tenderness  be  lent, 
The  grave,  sweet  nature  of  the  man  that  saw 
Most  power  in  peace  and  let  no  claptrap  awe 
His  high-poised  duty  from  its  primal  plan 
Of  rule  supreme  for  the  whole  good  of  man. 

In  this  grave  hour  —  Lord,  give  him  all  the  light, 
And  us  the  faith  that  peace  is  more  than  might, 
That  settled  nations  have  high  uses  still 
To  curb  the  hasty,  regulate  the  ill, 
And  without  bloodshed  from  the  darkest  hour 
Make  manifest  high  reason's  nobler  power. 


NATIONAL  HONOR  AND  PEACE 

By  Louis  BROIDO,  University  of  Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania, 
representing  the  North  Atlantic  Group 

Second  Prize  Oration  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  Mohonk  Lake, 
May  28,  1914 


NATIONAL  HONOR  AND  PEACE 

Since  the  dawn  of  history  the  teachers,  thinkers,  and 
prophets  of  mankind  have  prayed  and  labored  for  the 
abolition  of  war.  In  the  process  of  the  centuries,  their 
hope  has  become  the  aspiration  of  the  mass  of  men. 
Growing  slowly,  as  do  all  movements  for  righteousness, 
the  cause  of  peace  first  claimed  the  attention  of  the 
world  in  the  year  1899,  when  Nicholas  of  Russia  called 
the  nations  together  to  discuss  ways  and  means  for  the 
arbitration  of  international  differences  and  for  the  aboli- 
tion of  war.  From  that  day  on,  the  movement  for  peace 
has  progressed  by  leaps  and  bounds,  and  to-day  it  has 
reached  the  highest  point  of  its  development. 

Already  nations  have  signed  treaties  to  arbitrate  many 
of  their  differences.  Holland,  Denmark,  Argentina,  and 
Chile  have  agreed  to  arbitrate  every  dispute.  But  these 
nations  are  not  potent  enough  in  world  affairs  for  their 
action  to  have  an  international  influence.  It  remains  for 
the  great  powers  like  England,  France,  Germany,  and 
the  United  States  to  agree  to  submit  every  difficulty  to 
arbitration,  and  thus  take  the  step  that  will  result  in 
the  practical  abolition  of  war. 

If  one  would  find  the  reasons  that  thus  far  have  kept 
the  great  powers  from  agreeing  to  submit  all  differences 
to  arbitration,  his  search  need  not  be  long  nor  difficult. 
The  Peace  Conference  of  1907  reports  that  the  objec- 
tions to  international  arbitration  have  dwindled  to  four. 

131 


132  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

Of  these  objections  the  one  commonly  considered  of  most 
weight  is  this:  "We  will  not  submit  to  arbitration  ques- 
tions involving  our  national  honor."  Even  so  recently 
as  the  spring  of  1912,  our  own  Senate  refused  to  give 
its  assent  to  President  Taft's  proposed  treaties  with 
France  and  England  to  arbitrate  all  differences,  and  re- 
fused on  the  ground  that  "  we  cannot  agree  to  arbitrate 
questions  involving  our  national  honor."  This  is  the 
statement  that  you  and  I  as  workers  for  peace  are 
constantly  called  upon  to  refute. 

Let  us,  therefore,  consider  what  honor  is.  For  centu- 
ries honor  was  maintained  and  justice  determined  among 
men  by  a  strong  arm  and  a  skillfully  used  weapon.  It 
mattered  not  that  often  the  guilty  won  and  the  dishonor- 
able succeeded.  Death  was  the  arbiter,  honor  was  ap- 
peased, and  men  were  satisfied.  But  with  the  growth  of 
civilization  there  slowly  came  to  man  the  consciousness 
that  honor  can  be  maintained  only  by  use  of  reason  and 
justice  administered  only  in  the  light  of  truth.  Then 
private  settlement  of  quarrels  practically  ceased ;  trial 
by  combat  was  abolished ;  and  men  learned  that  real 
honor  lies  in  the  graceful  and  manly  acceptance  of  de- 
cisions rendered  by  impartial  judges. 

As  men  have  risen  to  higher  ideals  of  honor  in  their 
relations  with  one  another,  so  nations  have  risen  to  a 
higher  standard  in  international  affairs.  Centuries  ago 
tyrants  ruled  and  waged  war  on  any  pretext;  now  be- 
fore rulers  rush  to  arms,  they  stop  to  count  the  cost. 
Nations  once  thought  it  honorable  to  use  poisoned  bullets 
and  similar  means  of  destruction;  a  growing  humani- 
tarianism  has  compelled  them  to  abandon  such  practices. 
At  one  time  captives  were  killed  outright ;  there  was  a 


NATIONAL  HONOR  AND  PEACE  133 

higher  conception  of  honor  when  they  were  forced  into 
slavery ;  now  the  quickening  sense  of  universal  sym- 
pathy compels  belligerent  nations  to  treat  prisoners  of 
war  humanely  and  to  exchange  them  at  the  close  of  the 
conflict.  At  one  time  neutrals  were  not  protected ;  now 
their  rights  are  generally  recognized.  A  few  hundred 
years  ago  arbitration  was  almost  unknown ;  in  the  last 
century  more  than  six  hundred  cases  were  settled  by 
peaceful  means. 

During  the  last  quarter  of  a  century  we  have  caught 
a  glimpse  of  a  new  national  honor.  It  is  the. belief  that 
battle  and  bloodshed,  except  for  the  immediate  defense 
of  hearth  and  home,  is  a  blot  on  the  'scutcheon  of  any 
nation.  It  is  the  creed  of  modern  men  who  rise  in  their 
majesty  and  say:  "  We  will  not  stain  our  country's  honor 
with  the  bloodshed  of  war.  God-given  life  is  too  dear. 
The  forces  of  vice,  evil,  and  disease  are  challenging  us 
to  marshal  our  strength  and  give  them  battle.  There  is 
too  much  good  waiting  to  be  done,  too  much  suffering 
waiting  to  be  appeased,  for  us  to  waste  the  life-blood  of 
our  fathers  and  sons  on  the  field  of  useless  battle.  Here 
do  we  stand.  We  believe  we  are  right.  With  faith  in 
our  belief  we  throw  ourselves  upon  the  altar  of  truth. 
Let  heaven-born  justice  decide."  Here  is  honor  un- 
smirched,  untainted !  Here  is  pride  unhumbled  !  *  Here 
is  patriotism  that  is  all-embracing,  that  makes  us  so 
zealous  for  real  honor  that  we  turn  from  the  horrors 
of  war  to  combat  the  evils  that  lie  at  our  very  doors. 

We  know  that  faith  in  such  national  honor  will  abolish 
war.  We  know,  too,  that  men  will  have  war  only  so  long 
as  they  want  war.  If  this  be  true,  then,  just  as  soon  as 
you  and  I,  in  whose  hands  the  final  decision  for  or 


134  PKIZE  ORATIONS 

against  war  must  ever  rest,  express  through  the  force 
of  an  irresistible  public  opinion  the  doctrine  that  our 
conception  of  national  honor  demands  the  arbitration  of 
every  dispute,  just  so  soon  will  our  legislators  free  them- 
selves from  financial  dictators  and  liberate  the  country 
from  the  dominance  of  a  false  conception  of  national 
honor. 

Do  you  say  this  ideal  is  impractical  ?  History  proves 
that  questions  of  the  utmost  importance  can  be  peace- 
fully settled  without  the  loss  of  honor.  The  Casa  Blanca 
dispute  between  France  and  Germany,  the  Venezuela 
question,  the  North  Atlantic  Fisheries  case,  the  Alabama 
claims  —  these  are  proof  indisputable  that  questions  of 
honor  may  be  successfully  arbitrated.  "  Does  not  this 
magnificent  achievement,"  says  Carl  Schurz  of  the  Ala- 
bama settlement,  "  form  one  of  the  most  glorious  pages 
of  the  common  history  of  England  and  America?  Truly, 
the  two  great  nations  that  accomplished  this  need  not  be 
afraid  of  unadjustable  questions  of  honor  in  the  future." 

In  the  face  of  such  splendid  examples,  how  meaning- 
less is  the  doctrine  of  the  enemies  of  peace,  "  We  will 
not  arbitrate  questions  of  national  honor.  We  will  decide 
for  ourselves  what  is  right  and  for  that  right  we  will 
stand,  even  if  this  course  plunges  us  into  the  maelstrom 
of  warv  We  will  not  allow  our  country  to  be  dishonored 
by  any  other."  Well  has  Andrew  Carnegie  expressed  the 
modern  view :  "  Our  country  cannot  be  dishonored  by 
any  other  country,  or  by  all  the  powers  combined.  It 
is  impossible.  All  honor  wounds  are  self-inflicted.  We 
alone  can  dishonor  ourselves  or  our  country.  One  sure 
way  of  doing  so  is  to  insist  upon  the  unlawful  and  un- 
just demand  that  we  sit  as  judges  in  our  own  case, 


NATIONAL  HONOR  AND  PEACE  135 

instead  of  agreeing  to  abide  by  the  decision  of  a  court  or 
a  tribunal.  We  are  told  that  this  is  the  stand  of  a  weak- 
ling, that  progress  demands  the  fighting  spirit.  We,  too, 
demand  the  fighting  spirit;  but  we  condemn  the  military 
spirit.  We  are  told  that  strong  men  fight  for  honor.  We 
answer  with  Mrs.  Mead :  '  Justice  and  honor  are  larger 
words  than  peace,  and  if  fighting  would  enable  us  to  get 
justice  and  maintain  honor,  I  would  fight !  But  it  is  not 
that  way ! ' '  For  it  is  impossible  to  maintain  honor  by 
recourse  to  arms;  right  may  fall  before  might,  and, 
viewed  in  the  light  of  its  awful  cost,  even  victory  is 
defeat.  In  the  words  of  Nicholas  Murray  Butler :  "  To 
argue  that  a  nation's  honor  must  be  defended  by  the 
blood  of  its  citizens,  if  need  be,  is  quite  meaningless,  for 
any  nation,  though  profoundly  right  in  its  contention, 
might  be  defeated  at  the  hands  of  a  superior  force  ex- 
erted in  behalf  of  an  unjust  and  unrighteous  cause. 
What  becomes  of  national  honor  then  ?  " 

Too  long  have  we  been  fighting  windmills ;  we  must 
struggle  with  ourselves ;  we  must  conquer  the  passions 
that  have  blinded  our  reason.  We  have  been  enrolled  in 
the  army  of  thoughtlessness;  the  time  has  come  to  enroll 
in  the  army  of  God.  We  have  followed  a  false  ideal  of 
honor ;  we  must  disillusion  ourselves  and  the  world.  If 
men  declare  that  the  preservation  of  courage  and  manli- 
ness demand  that  we  fight,  let  us  lead  them  to  the  fight, 
not  against  each  other,  but  against  all  that  is  unright- 
eous and  undesirable  in  our  national  life.  Men  still  cling 
to  an  ancient  conception  of  national  honor;  let  us  con- 
vince them  that  there  is  a  newer  and  higher  conception. 
Men  still  declare  that  peace  is  the  dream  of  the  poet 
and  prophet;  let  us  prove  by  historical  example  that 


136  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

questions,  even  of  national  honor,  can  be  happily  settled 
by  arbitration.  If  men  despair,  let  us  remind  them  that 
to-day,  as  never  before,  the  mass  of  men  are  slowly  and 
surely  working  out  God's  plan  for  this  great  cause. 

The  day  of  triumph  is  not  far  distant.  Already  the 
moving  linger  of  Time  paints  on  the  wide  horizon,  in 
the  roseate  tints  of  the  dawn,  the  picture  of  Peace  — 
Peace,  the  victory  of  victories,  beside  which  Marathon 
and  Gettysburg  pale  into  insignificance  ;  victory  without 
the  strains  of  martial  music,  unaccompanied  by  the  sob 
of  widowed  and  orphaned ;  victory  on  God's  battlefield 
in  humanity's  war  on  war. 


THE  NEW  NATIONALISM  AND  THE 
PEACE  MOVEMENT 

By  RALPH  D.  LUCAS,  Knox   College,   Galesburg,  Illinois, 
representing  the  Central  Group 

Third  Prize  Oration  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  Mohonk  Lake, 
May  28,  1914 


THE  NEW  NATIONALISM  AND  THE 
PEACE  MOVEMENT 

Nationalism  is  a  precious  product  of  the  centuries. 
The  world  has  paid  a  tremendous  price  to  widen  the 
political  unit  until  its  boundaries  include  continents. 
It  has  been  an  equally  difficult  task  to  weld  the  spirit 
of  diverse  peoples  into  a  homogeneous  whole.  And  the 
story  of  this  development  constitutes  a  heritage  not  soon 
to  be  given  up.  The  tales  of  victory  and  defeat  are  held 
even  more  dear  to  a  united  people  than  life  itself.  Rightly 
will  any  nation  jealously  defy  him  who  dares  advance 
to  plunder  its  possessions.  And  it  is  well  that  men  do 
not  wish  to  surrender  it  upon  slight  provocation.  That 
has  been  a  good  diplomacy  that  sought  to  protect  the 
nation  by  war.  By  the  extension  of  political  unity 
peoples  gain  moral  and  physical  strength.  Thrift  be- 
comes more  common  and  moral  courage  greater  when  a 
people  strike  forward  with  common  aims.  And  in  pro- 
portion as  the  nation  as  a  whole  enjoys  these  advantages 
and  opportunities,  the  individual  widens  his  horizon  in 
peaceful  association  with  fellow  men  and  receives  a 
benefit  beyond  computation. 

But,  good  as  nationalism  has  been  in  the  past,  a  gradual 
change  seems  to  be  overtaking  the  world's  politics. 
National  diplomacy  hesitates  where  a  century  ago  it 
was  firm.  Forces  which  once  drove  the  nations  apart 
seem  now  to  be  drawing  them  together.  The  discord  of 

139 


140  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

disputes  seems  to  be  disappearing  in  the  harmony  of 
cooperation.  It  is  no  longer  possible  to  determine  easily 
what  a  nation's  interests  really  are.  And  it  is  of  the 
forces  that  are  bringing  about  this  change  in  the  policies 
of  nations,  of  this  new  nationalism  and  its  bearing  upon 
the  peace  movement,  that  I  wish  to  speak. 

Within  the  last  two  centuries  economic  forces  have 
worked  a  mighty  revolution.  Continents  have  been  con- 
verted into  communities.  The  prosperity  of  our  eastern 
industries  controls  the  activities  of  the  West,  and  a  dis- 
turbance from  any  section  throws  a  tremor  over  all. 
Tribal  barter  has  developed  into  a  world-wide  commerce 
until  the  most  distant  nation  may  easily  acquire  the 
products  of  another.  Steel  rails  weave  a  web  of  com- 
mercialism among  the  peoples,  and  the  cable  welds  them 
in  a  mighty  network  which,  responsive  to  every  flash  of 
news,  brings  all  the  nations  into  a  mutuality  of  interests. 
So  interdependent  are  the  nations  and  so  vital  are  their 
relations  that  a  single  fluctuation  in  the  most  distant 
market  finds  a  response  in  our  own.  A  slight  disorder 
in  Wall  Street  strains  the  whole  financial  world.  And 
thus  through  intercourse  in  commerce,  industry,  the 
press,  Christian  missions,  and  scholastic  research  a  sys- 
tem has  been  developed  that  holds  no  place  for  the  selfish 
policy  of  exploiting  backward  peoples.  We  no  longer 
consider  the  advance  of  alien  peoples  in  wealth  and 
prosperity  as  a  menace  to  our  own.  There  is  being  de- 
veloped a  strong  international  public  opinion  which  real- 
izes that  anything  that  destroys  the  well-being  of  one 
member  is  the  concern  of  all. 

In  the  light  of  these  facts,  future  world-politics  can 
can  have  no  place  for  the  settlement  of  disputes  by  force. 


NATIONALISM  AND  THE  PEACE  MOVEMENT      141 

A  declaration  of  war  by  one  of  the  large  powers  to-day 
would  be  more  terrible  than  it  has  ever  been  in  the  past. 
The  man  of  business,  of  education,  of  philanthropy,  of 
civic  advancement  cannot  reasonably  advocate  a  policy 
that  would  ruin  business,  stagnate  education,  increase 
poverty,  and  turn  progress  over  to  the  ravages  of  man- 
slaughter. Industry  cannot  continue  when  the  shoulder 
that  should  turn  the  wheels  of  industry  grows  Aveary 
beneath  the  weight  of  the  musket.  Education  cannot 
proceed  when  libraries  and  lecture  halls  are  deserted  for 
the  camp  and  fortress.  A  Tolstoy  with  all  his  power  of 
vivid  presentation  does  not  overdraw  the  picture.  The 
moral  fiber  and  physical  strength  of  a  people  must  for- 
ever afterward  bear  their  scars.  A  struggling  people  can 
never  rid  themselves  of  the  evil  effects  of  the  conflict, 
although  they  may  rejoice  in  the  valor  of  their  heroes. 
Nations  cannot  afford  to  become  the  theaters  of  carnage 
and  bloodshed  and  the  rendezvous  of  commercial  and 
moral  pirates  and  civic  grafters. 

Why,  then,  do  nations  throw  away  their  strength  in 
the  building  and  equipping  of  armies  and  navies  ?  The 
advocates  of  militarism  tell  us  that  we  need  a  navy  to 
protect  our  commerce.  Possibly  it  is  true  that  under  the 
present  system  of  international  law  this  is  somewhat 
excusable;  for  although  private  property  on  land  is 
exempt  from  confiscation  and  the  old  forms  of  privateer- 
ing have  long  ago  been  abolished  by  an  agreement  of 
the  powers,  yet  the  policy  does  not  apply  to  maritime 
warfare.  Enemy's  goods  in  enemy's  ships  are  still  sub- 
ject to  seizure.  But  while  this  argument  does  hold  for 
the  present,  the  condition  could  easily  be  remedied. 
Because  a  man  with  foreign  capital  operates  ships  instead 


142  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

of  factories,  why  is  there  any  special  reason  for  exposing 
his  property  to  depredation  ?  In  the  light  of  common 
sense  such  a  policy  seems  absurd.  And  it  should  be  one 
of  the  first  aims  of  our  diplomats  to  eliminate  all  possi- 
bility of  this  licensed  robbery,  for  as  long  as  it  exists 
there  will  always  be  the  cry  for  extravagant  expenditure 
in  order  to  preserve  international  peace. 

But  even  if  we  should  not  need  a  navy  to  protect  our 
commerce,  again  the  opponents  of  the  policy  of  settling 
international  disputes  by  arbitration  say  that  we  need 
armies  and  navies  to  preserve  our  honor.  They  tell  us 
that  there  are  certain  questions  which  cannot  be  sub- 
mitted to  any  tribunal ;  that  a  nation  must  reserve  the 
right  to  submit  only  those  questions  it  sees  fit.  Surrender 
this  right,  and  prestige  and  self-respect  are  gone  and  we 
become  a  nation  of  "  mollycoddles  "  whose  patriotism  has 
no  virile  qualities.  It  is  true  that  the  independence  and 
security  of  each  nation  is  essential  to  international  life. 
It  is  self-governing  nations,  not  subjugated  ones,  that 
make  possible  a  strong  international  life.  But  the  con- 
verse is  equally  true.  An  international  life  made  up  of 
independent,  cooperating,  and  mutually  helpful  nations 
is  the  best  security  by  which  national  life  can  be  guar- 
anteed. Those  who  say  that  questions  of  national  honor 
cannot  be  submitted  to  a  tribunal  have  a  wrong  concep- 
tion of  the  essence  of  national  life.  Love  of  country 
means  more  than  a  mere  willingness  to  serve  as  a  target 
for  the  enemy's  guns.  We  would  not  deduct  one  iota 
from  the  respect  and  honor  due  those  who  have  served 
the  nation  on  the  field  of  battle.  But  what  a  service 
they  might  have  rendered  if  they  had  been  spared  that 
life  to  live  serving  their  fellow  men  and  contributing  to 


NATIONALISM  AND  THE  PEACE  MOVEMENT      143 

the  vigor  of  the  race !  None  of  us  will  give  up  his  firm 
resolve  to  defend  his  own  country  with  all  his  strength. 
But  theirs  is  a  cheap  patriotism  which  depends  for  its 
expression  upon  the  thrilling  note  of  fife  and  drum.  The 
great  test  of  patriotism  is  the  everyday  purpose  to  deal 
justly  with  one's  neighbor.  Let  him  who  would  be  a 
patriot  and  serve  the  nation  put  his  life  into  the  work 
close  at  hand,  and,  with  a  civic  temper  and  moral  courage 
that  can  grip  the  scourge,  rid  our  social  life  of  its  damn- 
ing influences.  This  is  the  spirit  of  true  national  honor. 
This  it  is  that  makes  of  a  nation  a  real  nation.  The  call 
to  arms  is  but  another  signal  of  the  defeat  of  the  under- 
lying principles  of  civilization. 

Only  slowly  will  any  large  number  of  the  people  ac- 
cept these  new  conceptions.  But  there  are  already  hopeful 
signs.  The  growing  sentiment  is  rapidly  crystallizing. 
The  developing  code  of  international  equity  as  expressed 
by  the  establishment  of  such  an  institution  as  the  Hague 
Court  is  a  step  in  the  right  direction.  The  peaceful  set- 
tlement of  the  Venezuelan  boundary  dispute  was  an 
honor  to  the  nations  involved.  And  the  work  of  the 
International  Commission  of  Inquiry  in  the  Dogger  Bank 
episode  between  Russia  and  England  is  significant  of  the 
trend.  Again,  a  modern  innovation  was  wrought  when 
the  International  Conference  in  1906  settled  the  con- 
flicting interests  of  Germany,  France,  and  Spain  in 
Morocco.  Within  the  last  century  the  powers  ratified 
over  two  hundred  treaties,  each  providing  for  the  peace- 
ful settlement  by  tribunals  of  specified  international  dis- 
putes. It  is  true  that  most  peace  treaties  have  dealt 
almost  exclusively  with  legal  questions.  The  nations 
have  hesitated  to  submit  all  international  differences  to 


144  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

a  court  of  arbitration.  But  the  spirit  for  arbitral  settle- 
ment is  widening.  And  this  spirit  is  not  for  a  mere 
avoidance  of  war,  but  seeks  the  substitution  of  a  better 
method  than  war  for  determining  justice  between  nations. 
Each  nation  has  its  own  individual  problems  to  deal  with, 
and  in  this  respect  all  cannot  proceed  according  to  set 
rules.  The  movement  does  not  mean  the  extinction  and 
obliteration  of  nationality  and  national  rights.  The  indi- 
vidual has  not  been  minimized  because  he  consents  to 
submit  his  differences  with  his  fellow  men  to  a  court  for 
settlement.  And  this  must  be  the  ultimate  attitude  of 
nations  whose  honor  we  have  a  right  to  guard  jealously. 
What,  then,  shall  be  our  program  ?  Whatever  attitude 
is  to  be  adopted,  most  people  agree  that  the  day  of  uni- 
versal peace  is  far  in  the  future.  The  Balkans  and 
Mexico  remind  us  of  the  difficulty  lying  before  the 
coming  generations.  But  the  numerous  peace  societies 
whose  purpose  it  is  to  circulate  authentic  documents, 
that  the  great  mass  of  citizens  may  be  brought  into  sym- 
pathetic touch  through  accurate  information,  are  doing 
much  for  the  cause.  The  erection  of  the  Hague  Court 
gives  something  lasting  and  tangible  to  work  from. 
And,  above  all,  the  nations  will  rise  to  higher  standards 
principally  by  adopting  the  ideals  of  the  individual.  As 
man  has  risen  above  his  barbaric  ideals,  so  will  the  nations 
throw  their  military  expenditures  into  the  coffers  of  public 
welfare  as  they  come  more  and  more  to  judge  their  suc- 
cesses, not  by  victories  in  war  but  by  achievements  in 
education,  commerce,  industry,  and  artizanship.  And, 
proceeding  with  such  aims,  the  established  international 
court  must  be  the  medium  through  which  all  differences 
will  be  settled.  We  shall  discover  that  our  internal 


NATIONALISM  AND  THE  PEACE  MOVEMENT      145 

policy  of  dealing  with  the  individual  can  be  more  easily 
applied  to  international  relations  than  was  at  first  sup- 
posed. And  having  reached  this  point  in  the  evolution 
of  international  peace,  there  must  be  added  to  the  inter- 
national court  a  world-wide  police  force.  As  the  system 
develops  and  our  prejudices  are  abandoned,  a  method  of 
policing  must  stand  as  an  enforcer  of  international  law. 
Until  then  there  is  little  hope  that  military  expenditures 
will  radically  diminish,  for  we  cannot  reasonably  abolish 
our  present  methods  unless  we  have  something  secure 
to  substitute. 

Perhaps  such  a  system  will  not  abolish  the  utter  pos- 
sibility of  war.  Only  the  future  can  tell  us  what  heights 
of  success  the  policy  will  reach.  There  are  those  of  us 
who  have  high  hopes  because  we  believe  in  the  good 
sense  of  the  American  people  and  of  our  great  contem- 
poraries. By  the  past  we  are  made  confident  of  the 
future.  But  if  the  goal  is  to  be  reached,  it  is  for  us  as 
individual  citizens  to  contribute  our  influence  toward 
developing  the  attitude  of  peace  among  our  fellow  men. 
For  our  international  welfare  and  for  the  honor  of  the 
newest  of  great  nations,  may  we  in  this  issue  throw  our 
influence,  as  a  united  people,  on  the  side  of  a  higher 
international  morality  !  May  the  united  peoples  of  the 
world  abolish  the  prejudices  of  misconceptions  and, 
drawn  together  by  common  interests,  resolve  that  the 
priceless  heritage  of  centuries  shall  not  be  imperiled  by 
war !  And  thus  over  a  warring  humanity  the  breaking 
day  of  peace  shall  be  hastened,  at  whose  high  noon  there 
shall  be  heard  not  the  clashing  of  arms  but  the  increas- 
ing hum  of  prosperity  under  the  sway  of  the  new  and 
better  national  life. 


MAN'S   MORAL  NATURE   THE  HOPE   OF 
UNIVERSAL  PEACE 

By  VICTOR  MORRIS,  University  of  Oregon,  Eugene,  Oregon 
representing  the  Pacific  Coast  Group 

Fourth  Prize  Oration  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  Mohonk  Lake, 
May  28,  1914 


MAN'S   MORAL  NATURE   THE  HOPE  OF 
UNIVERSAL  PEACE 

Two  thousand  years  ago  the  coming  of  a  Prince  of 
Peace,  the  Prince  of  Peace,  inaugurated  the  fulfillment 
of  the  prophetic  promise  that  "  peace  shall  cover  the 
earth,"  and  that  "  man  shall  learn  war  no  more  forever." 
From  the  time  of  Jesus  until  now  men  have  passively 
accepted  the  idea,  but  have  failed  to  do  their  part  in  its 
fulfillment.  To-day  there  are  few  indeed  but  believe  that 
it  would  be  desirable  to  abolish  war.  Many  also  feel  in 
a  way  that  war  is  brutal.  But  here  our  feelings  on  this 
great  question  largely  end.  We  are  not  aroused  to  talk, 
and  work,  and  fight  against  war  as  inhuman,  as  economic 
folly,  as  unreason,  and  especially  as  an  immorality  and 
a  sin.  Now  we  are  not  here  to  harangue  about  the  phys- 
ical sufferings  wrought  through  war,  but  we  are  here  to 
inquire  and  find  out  what  we  can  do  about  it.  How  are 
we  going  to  attack  the  war  problem  in  order  to  bring 
about  action,  instead  of  simply  talk  and  discussion  ?  In 
considering  this  war  problem  it  is  well  to  bear  in  mind 
the  fact  that  war  is  a  resultant  of  a  deeper  cause,  the  war 
spirit.  The  war  spirit  is  the  spirit  of  him  who  first  made 
war  in  heaven ;  the  war  spirit  —  ambitious,  aggressive, 
covetous  and  revengeful,  rampant  through  the  centuries, 
never  conquered  by  force,  in  war  subdued  only  by 
exhaustion.  This  war  spirit  still  exists  to  scourge  the 
nations  with  war,  to  stagger  with  its  problem  of  war  the 

149 


150  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

brains  of  statesmen  believing  in  peace.  How  are  we  to 
attack  this  stupendous  problem  ?  What  appeal  can  we 
make  to  the  nations  that  will  be  strong  enough  to  do 
away  with  the  Avar  spirit  ? 

In  order  to  overthrow  this  mighty  evil,  certainly  every 
possible  force  must  be  enlisted.  The  thought  which  I 
wish  to  bring  to  you  is  this :  While  such  appeals  as  those 
to  economy  and  to  reason  are  of  value,  they  are  not  in 
themselves  strong  enough  to  cause  the  nations  to  abolish 
war ;  and  hence,  in  view  of  the  real  inner  nature  of  the 
war  spirit,  man's  moral  nature,  working  through  a  devel- 
oped conscience  upon  war,  is  the  only  force  strong  enough 
to  effect  universal  peace. 

Against  war  peace-advocates  appeal  with  force  from  a 
business  standpoint,  on  grounds  of  economy  and  finan- 
cial expediency.  The  vast  system  of  international  trade 
and  commerce  calls  for  world  peace.  The  prosperity  of 
world-industries  and  business  requires  good  will  and 
brotherhood  between  the  nations.  So  heavy,  also,  have 
the  burdens  of  war  and  militarism  become  that  three 
fourths  of  our  own  expenditures  go  for  war  purposes, 
past  and  present,  and  in  Great  Britain  two  thirds  are  so 
spent.1  Every  German  citizen,  it  is  said,  carries  a  soldier 
on  his  back.  By  the  testimony  of  financiers  and  min- 
isters of  state  themselves,  nothing  but  financial  ruin  and 
bankruptcy  await  the  nations  if  the  present  military 
tragedy  continues.  But  has  this  obvious  condition  of 
affairs  affected  the  race  for  armaments  ?  Not  unless  it 
has  accelerated  it.  To  every  appeal  to  economy  the 
reply  is  that  the  outlay  is  necessary  if  we  are  to  exist  at 

1  The  percentages  as  a  matter  of  fact  are  not  so  large,  but  the  argument 
is  not  impaired  by  the  fact.  — Editor 


THE  HOPE  OF  UNIVERSAL  PEACE  151 

all.  But  even  suppose  that  for  a  season  the  economic 
motive  should  lead  us  to  abolish  war,  as  soon  as  financial 
advantage  was  apparent  to  a  nation  through  war  it  is 
evident  that  all  restraints  would  be  removed  and  war 
ensue  again.  The  same  motive  used  to  abolish  war  would 
bring  war  once  more.  Again,  when  we  remember  that  it 
is  the  deeper  cause,  the  war  spirit,  that  we  must  quench, 
we  can  understand  why  this  appeal  is  often  made  to 
those  who  hear  not.  So  far  as  the  great  mass  of  men  is 
concerned,  purely  economic  considerations  cannot  change 
the  spirit  and  impulses  of  the  soul.  History  reveals  no 
great  uplifting  of  humanity  or  change  in  ideals  as  having 
arisen  through  purely  economic  or  financial  considerations. 
The  peace  plea  has  also  been  based  on  grounds  of 
reason.  Clearly  has  it  been  pointed  out  that  reason 
demands  that  no  person  shall  sit  in  judgment  on  his  own 
case,  yet  this  we  do  in  a  resort  to  arms.  War  is  not 
arbitrament  by  reason,  but  arbitrament  by  the  sword. 
Every  plain  argument  of  reason  condemns  war  and 
militarism.  The  arguments  of  reason  have,  indeed,  been 
strong,  and  have  attracted  much  attention,  resulting  in 
the  settlement  of  many  disputes  by  arbitration.  But  as 
concerns  the  final  wiping  out  of  war  and  the  surrender- 
ing of  heavy  armaments,  reason  alone  cannot  present  a 
permanent  powerful  appeal,  for  it  is  easy  in  times  of 
stress  to  plead  that  reason  and  justice  demand  the  war. 
Never  was  there  a  fight  but  the  contending  parties 
claimed  they  were  justified.  But  the  chief  fact  that 
seems  to  put  reason  in  the  category  of  impotent  appeals 
is  the  fact  that  it  is  an  appeal  to  the  mind,  while  the  war 
spirit  can  only  be  removed  by  an  appeal  to  the  heart, 
wherein  it  resides.  We  may  reason  with  nations  all  we 


152  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

please,  but  when  the  war  fury  arises,  then  all  the  reason- 
ing proves  to  have  been  in  vain,  the  appeal  to  the  mind 
turns  out  to  be  too  feeble. 

Appeals  to  economy  and  reason,  then,  are  appeals 
we  must  make,  but  they  are  too  weak  in  themselves 
to  make  a  permanent  impression  against  the  war  spirit. 
We  must  then  look  for  some  additional,  some  more 
compelling,  force. 

Let  us  examine  the  real  inner  nature  of  war,  for  this 
ought  surely  to  throw  some  light  upon  our  problem. 
War  is  not  economy;  it  is  not  reason.  Is  war,  then, 
morality  ?  Is  it  virtue  ?  It  would  hardly  seem  neces- 
sary for  vis  to  answer  this  question,  for  modern  civilized 
nations  long  ago  recognized  blood  feuds  with  their  kin- 
dred as  contrary  to  real  morality,  as  nothing  but  murder ; 
but  they  seem  unable  to  recognize  that  war  is  just  the 
same  —  nothing  but  legalized,  organized  murder.  From 
the  use  of  violence  in  settling  our  international  disputes 
arise  all  the  deadly  passions  of  the  soul,  such  as  treach- 
ery, insolence,  revenge,  and  a  murderous  spirit,  with 
the  accompanying  fruits  of  robbery,  misery,  and  blood. 
Surely,  O  nations !  nothing  which  bears  such  fruits  can 
be  anything  but  corrupt,  for  a  good  tree  cannot  bring 
forth  evil  fruit,  neither  can  a  corrupt  tree  bring  forth 
good  fruit. 

Look  also  at  its  relationship  to  civilization  and  citizen- 
ship, and  its  effects  upon  them.  "War  and  civilization," 
said  one  of  the  great  English  ministers,  e?  are  contradic- 
tory terms,  even  as  Christ  and  Mars."  Particularly 
damaging  is  the  effect  of  war  upon  citizens.  For  does  it 
not  blunt  the  sensibilities,  harden  the  heart,  inflame  the 
mind  with  passions,  and  deaden  the  consciences  of  men  ? 


THE  HOPE  OF  UNIVERSAL  PEACE  153 

Said  the  same  great  English  preacher,  "  The  sword  that 
smites  the  enemy  abroad,  also  lays  bare  the  primeval 
savage  within  the  citizen  at  home."  And  again,  "  War  is 
not  so  horrible  in  that  it  drains  the  dearest  veins  of  the 
foe,  but  in  that  it  drains  our  own  hearts  of  the  yet  mo're 
precious  elements  of  pity,  mercy,  generosity,  which  are 
the  lifeblood  of  the  soul." 

What  now  must  be  our  conclusion  about  war  ?  Had 
we  ten  thousand  voices,  surely  every  one  would  be  in 
honor  bound  to  declare  war  an  immorality.  Every  inci- 
dent of  war  declares  it  such.  Every  result  of  battle  hands 
down  the  same  decree.  In  the  words  of  a  famous 
Russian  battle  painter,  we  too  may  define  war  as  "  the 
antithesis  of  all  morality." 

This  clear  idea  of  the  real  inner  nature  of  war  ought 
surely  to  enable  us  to  find  our  ground  of  attack.  Since 
war  is  sin  and  war  is  crime,  the  conclusion  which  we 
draw  is,  that  if  it  is  possible  ever  to  abolish  war,  man's 
conscience,  his  sense  of  right  and  wrong,  is  the  only  force 
powerful  enough  to  accomplish  the  result. 

The  great  searchlight  of  morality  must  be  turned  on 
war  —  a  searchlight  which  is  always  bright  and  strong , 
and  which  never  has  failed  to  reveal  the  truth.  To  turn 
this  on  full  and  strong  means  to  awaken  the  consciences 
of  men.  It  must  be  an  individual  proposition — not  simply 
the  developed  consciences  of  a  few  leaders  who  may  be 
submerged  by  the  war  spirit  of  the  masses,  but  there 
must  be  developed  consciences  of  all  the  people  indi- 
vidually. All  our  arbitration  treaties  and  the  actual  set- 
tlement of  disputes  by  arbitration  are  of  great  value  and 
should  be  pressed  as  far  as  possible  ;  but  are  these  suffi- 
cient forces  to  develop  the  consciences  of  men  against 


154  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

war  as  an  immorality  and  a  sin?  What  are  the  forces 
that  have  always  come  to  our  support  against  an  immo- 
rality and  a  sin  ? 

How  about  our  churches?  Have  they  been  doing 
their  duty  ?  Have  they  made  it  clear  that  war  is  sin  and 
war  is  crime  ?  Has  not  the  Church  been  too  easy  ?  Has 
its  voice  sounded  clear  and  strong  on  this  world-evil? 
Surely  a  duty  rests  upon  the  ministry  to  be  insistent  in 
its  characterization  of  war.  What  peace-advocates  must 
do  is  to  urge  this  upon  the  Church  and  bring  it  to  a  real- 
ization of  its  duty.  Church  members  know  the  character 
of  war  and  simply  need  to  have  the  matter  brought  home 
to  their  hearts. 

What  about  our  schools, —  not  simply  the  colleges  and 
universities,  but  all  the  schools, —  which  offer  fertile 
ground  to  sow  the  seeds  of  peace  ?  Thus  far  in  the  history 
of  our  schools  too  much  emphasis  has  been  laid  upon  mili- 
tary history,  etc.  Dates  and  events  of  national  wars  have 
been  thoroughly  drilled  into  students,  and  the  glory  and 
blaze  of  war  brought  out.  We  have  actually  made  it  a 
glory  and  a  virtue.  One  of  the  most  encouraging  signs 
of  the  times,  however,  is  the  fact  that  many  of  our  text- 
books are  dropping  out  the  prolonged  study  of  wars  and 
centering  more  on  the  peaceful  pursuits  of  the  nation 
and  the  commercial  relations  with  foreign  powers.  How 
about  direct  peace  teaching  in  the  lower  schools  ?  How 
much  of  it  do  we  include  in  the  work  ?  None  at  all. 
Many  are  the  speakers  who  address  the  schools  on  war 
reminiscences,  but  few  indeed  are  the  appeals  made  for 
peace.  Not  until  this  movement  is  strongly  emphasized 
in  our  schools  from  the  very  beginning  can  we  hope 
completely  to  drive  out  the  war  spirit;  for  time  is 


THE  HOPE  OF  UNIVERSAL  PEACE  155 

required  to  develop  in  the  individual  conscience  a  full 
realization  of  the  real  nature  of  war,  and  such  develop- 
ment should  begin  with  the  plastic  period  of  youth. 

With  Church  and  school  lined  up  on  the  side  of  peace, 
the  home  teaching  will  soon  fall  in  line ;  and  Church, 
school,  and  home  combined  can  develop  so  strong  a  con- 
viction concerning  war,  can  make  so  forceful  an  appeal 
to  man's  moral  nature,  that  the  war  spirit  will  take  its 
leave  and  be  gone  forever. 

We  always  look  to  history  for  a  confirmation  of  our 
beliefs,  and  let  us  glance  now  to  the  records  of  the  past 
and  learn  her  teachings. 

First  of  all,  look  at  the  duel  as  the  mode  of  settling 
a  personal  difficulty  if  peaceful  settlement  appeared  im- 
possible. First,  it  was  heartily  accepted  as  a  gentlemanly, 
honorable,  and  brave  mode  of  settlement.  Then,  toler- 
ated and  simply  suffered  to  exist.  Finally,  condemned 
by  conscience  as  an  immorality  and  a  sin,  it  was  banished 
from  civilized  nations. 

Look  also  at  slavery.  At  first  heartily  accepted  as  a 
divine  arrangement.  Then  tolerated  by  the  world  as 
undesirable,  yet  not  necessarily  wrong.  Next  its  over- 
throwal  attempted  on  grounds  of  pity  and  of  reason; 
until  finally,  recognized  as  an  immorality  and  a  sin,  it 
too  was  blotted  from  the  pages  of  civilization. 

No  great  uplift  of  humanity,  no  great  movement  in 
civilization,  but  has  found  its  path  to  success  in  the 
developed  moral  sense  of  man.  No  great  change  in 
civilized  institutions  but  has  found  itself  produced  by 
the  dynamic,  moving  forces  of  morality. 

War  must  be  abolished.  Only  the  great  powers  of 
morality  are  vital  enough,  are  dynamic  and  powerful 


156  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

enough,  to  carry  out  our-  peace  program.  These  forces 
lie  dormant,  and  simply  need  stimulation  and  develop- 
ment. Recognizing  the  impotency  of  appeals  to  economy 
and  to  reason,  what  are  we  going  to  do  ? 

In  the  name  of  humanity  let  us  impeach  war  and  the 
war  spirit.  It  is  a  traitor  to  every  ideal  of  civilization 
and  of  justice.  It  is  the  instrument  of  hatred  and  of 
pride,  the  agent  of  jealousy  and  of  avarice.  In  the  name 
of  the  dead  and  dying,  in  the  name  of  justice,  which  it 
dethrones,  in  the  name  of  those  whose  loved  ones  it 
demands,  we  impeach  war  as  a  traitor,  guilty  of  all  high 
crimes  and  misdemeanors.  What  else  shall  we  do  ?  Stir 
up  from  its  greatest  depths  the  heart  of  man.  Educate 
his  conscience  till  he  is  unwilling  to  suffer  war  to  exist. 
Begin  early  in  Church,  school,  and  home  to  instil  in  the 
minds  of  young  and  old  continually  the  true  conception 
of  war,  that  it  is  an  immorality,  contrary  to  every  prin- 
ciple of  Christianity  and  to  every  teaching  of  our  Christ. 

Let  us  bring  into  the  conflict  against  war  the  great, 
dynamic,  motive  force  —  the  Moral  Nature  of  Man. 
And  when  we  shall  have  thus  developed  the  consciences 
of  men,  there  will  henceforth  be  laid  up  for  us  a  crown 
of  victory,  as  there  will  then  be  a  fuller  realization  that 
in  man's  moral  nature  is  the  Hope  of  Universal  Peace. 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  TWENTIETH  CENTURY 

By  HAROLD  HUSTED,  Ottawa  University,  Ottawa,  Kansas, 
representing  the  Western  Group 

Fifth  Prize  Oration  in  the  National  Contest  held  at  Mohonk  Lake, 
May  28,  1914 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  TWENTIETH  CENTURY 

Age  by  age,  civilization  advances.  Each  successive  era 
has  contributed  that  invention  or  accomplished  that 
achievement  which  has  placed  another  round  in  the 
great  ladder  of  civilization.  The  development  of  many 
small  states  into  powerful  nations,  and  many  wonderful 
improvements  in  other  fields,  such  as  steam  navigation, 
the  railroad,  the  telegraph,  and  wireless  communication, 
crown  the  last  as  the  greatest  of  centuries  in  the  history 
of  the  human  family.  It  is  difficult  to  understand  why 
the  human  mind,  whence  these  mighty  inspirations  orig- 
inated, has  been  incapable  of  realizing  that  there  still 
remains  the  most  degrading,  the  most  deteriorating,  the 
foulest  blot  that  ever  disgraced  this  world  —  the  killing 
of  civilized  men,  by  men,  as  a  permissible  mode  of  set- 
tling international  disputes.  This  world  can  never  at- 
tain its  highest  standard  of  civilization  until  this  one 
disgraceful  blemish,  called  war,  is  obliterated.  It  is  the 
collective  task  of  the  people  living  in  this  twentieth 
century  to  bring  into  reality  the  millennium  of  Tennyson, 

Till  the  war  drum  throbs  no  longer,  and  the  battle-flags  are  furl'd 
In  the  Parliament  of  Man,  the  Federation  of  the  World. 

The  beginning  of  this  social  task,  then,  is  the  enlight- 
enment of  the  peoples  as  to  the  immorality,  waste,  and 
ineffectiveness  of  war.  God  commanded,  "  Thou  shalt 
not  kill."  Who  shall  presume  to  declare  that  this  precept 

159 


160  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

was  directed  not  to  nations  but  to  individuals  only  ? 
that  one  man  shall  not  kill,  but  nations  may  ?  We  are 
horrified  at  the  report  of  a  single  murder,  yet,  if  viewed 
from  the  light  of  truth,  what  is  war  but  wholesale  mur- 
der ?  What  tongue,  what  pen,  can  describe  the  bloody 
havoc  of  the  battle  of  Gettysburg,  where,  between  the 
rise  and  set  of  a  single  sun,  fifty  thousand  of  our  fellow 
men  sank  to  earth,  dead  or  wounded  ? 

What  sentiment  in  human  hearts  which  needs  to  be 
perpetuated  sent  rank  after  rank,  column  after  column, 
of  blue  soldiers  against  the  impregnable  stone  wall  of 
Fredericksburg  ?  And  who  will  place  the  blame  for  the 
carnage  of  Cold  Harbor  elsewhere  than  upon  the  folly 
of  misguided  patriotism  and  cruel,  selfish  interests  that 
made  the  bloody  battle  possible  ? 

Every  soldier  is  connected,  as  all  of  us,  by  dear  ties 
of  kindred,  love,  and  friendship.  Perhaps  there  is  an  aged 
mother,  who  fondly  hoped  to  lean  her  bending  form  on 
his  more  youthful  arm ;  perhaps  a  young  wife,  whose 
life  is  entwined  inseparably  with  his  ;  perchance  a  sister, 
a  brother.  But  as  he  falls  on  the  field  of  battle,  must 
not  all  these  suffer  ?  His  aged  mother  surely  falls  with 
him.  His  young  wife  is  suddenly  widowed,  his  children 
orphaned.  That  husband's  helping  hand  is  forever  stayed. 
A  parent's  voice  is  stilled,  and  the  children's  plaintive 
cries  for  their  loving  father  fall  on  unheeding  ears.  Tell 
me,  friends,  you  who  know  the  bitterness  of  parting  with 
dear  ones  whom  you  watched  tenderly  through  the  last 
hopeful  moments,  can  you  measure  your  anguish  ?  Yet, 
what  a  contrast!  Your  dear  ones  departed  soothed  by 
kindness  and  love,  while  the  dying  soldier  gasped  out 
his  life  on  the  battlefield  alone. 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  TWENTIETH  CENTURY       161 

And  what  a  waste  is  war !  We  are  just  beginning  to 
realize  the  tremendous  cost,  the  incalculable  wastefulness", 
'not  only  of  actual  war  but  of  the  preparation  for  future 
possible  wars.  For  the  current  fiscal  year  ending  June  30, 
1914,  the  United  States  has  appropriated  in  round  num- 
bers' $535,000,000,  in  preparation  for  future  wars  and 
because  of  wars  fought  in  the  past.  Sixty-seven  cents 
out  of  every  dollar  expended  by  our  national  govern- 
ment goes  to  feed  the  present-day  mania  for  war,  pres- 
ent and  past,  leaving  only  thirty-three  cents  out  of 
each  dollar  for  the  combined  expense  of  the  executive, 
legislative,  and  judicial  departments  of  our  national 
government.  When  we  realize  that  the  cost  of  a  single 
battleship  exceeds  the  total  value  of  all  the  grounds 
and  buildings  of  all  the  colleges  and  universities  in  the 
state  of  Kansas,  the  figures  indicating  this  expense  have 
more  meaning  to  us.  And  when  we  reflect  that  the 
cost  of  a  single  shot  from  one  of  the  great  guns  of 
that  battleship  is  $1700,  enough  to  send  a  young  man 
through  college,  the  common  man  realizes  that  the 
United  States  cannot  afford  to  go  to  war  or  even 
prepare  for  war. 

And  all  this  suffering  and  cost  are  to  no  purpose. 
War  is  utterly  ineffectual  to  secure  or  advance  its  pro- 
fessed object.  The  wretchedness  it  involves  contributes 
to  no  beneficial  result,  helps  to  establish  no  right,  and, 
therefore,  in  no  respect  promotes  harmony  between  the 
contending  nations. 

When  the  Saviour  was  born,  angels  from  heaven  sang 
to  the  children  of  the  human  family  this  benediction : 

Glory  to  God  in  the  highest, 

Peace  on  earth,  good  will  toward  men. 


PRIZE  ORATIONS 

And  at  last,  in  the  beginning  of  this  twentieth  century, 
nations  seem  to  be  visibly  approaching  that  unity  so 
long  hoped  and  prayed  for ;  and  that  nation  which  shall 
precede  all  others  in  the  abolition  of  war  will  be  crowned 
by  history  with  everlasting  honor.  The  risk  will  be  very 
little,  the  gain  incalculable. 

We  are  corning  to  believe  that  the  most  significant 
fact  about  man  and  his  civilization  is  their  improv ability. 
Individual  inventive  genius  has  added  improvement  after 
improvement  until  it  would  seem  that  man's  mastery  over 
nature  is  to  be  well-nigh  complete  as  these  ideas  and  in- 
ventions are  socialized  and  extended  to  benefit  all.  We 
are  now  entering  the  era  of  social  achievement  when 
mankind  unitedly  undertakes  by  organization  and  cooper- 
ation mightier  tasks  than  ever  accomplished  before.  Many 
dreadful  diseases  are  disappearing  before  preventive  medi- 
cine, and  sanitary  science  is  eliminating  many  plagues ; 
pestilence  is  coming  to  be  a  thing  of  the  past.  Human 
welfare  is  now  the  concern  of  cooperative  mankind,  and 
social  science  will  condemn  and  banish  war  or  fail  to 
establish  itself  as  an  applied  science.  It  can  be  done ! 
It  ought  to  be  done !  It  will  be  done ! 

And  although  this  consummation  seems  to  many  far 
away,  it  may  be  accomplished  by  very  simple  methods. 
It  only  waits  the  time  of  concerted  action  on  the  part  of 
the  leading  nations  when  the  principles  of  arbitration 
can  be  invoked  more  fully,  and  a  world-court  established 
with  plenary  powers  for  settling  all  disputes  between 
the  nations. 

International  legislation  has  occurred  repeatedly, 
though  no  world-court  has  as  yet  been  established.  In 
the  case  of  the  Universal  Postal  Union  we  have  what 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  TWENTIETH  CENTURY       163 

is  tantamount  to  world-legislation,  in  that  all  civilized 
nations  have  entered  into  a  formal  agreement  regarding 
the  delivery  of  mail.  Another  instance  of  practical  world- 
legislation  is  that  of  the  International  Bureau  of  Weights 
and  Measures.  Many  other  examples  might  be  given  in 
which  several  nations  are  parties  to  an  agreement  regard- 
ing some  important  measure,  such  as  the  respect  paid  to 
the  flag  of  truce,  the  regulations  concerning  commerce 
on  the  high  seas,  and  the  etiquette  of  diplomacy.  Para- 
mount in  world-importance  has  been  the  agreement  of 
the  leading  nations  of  the  world  in  the  establishment  of 
the  Hague  conferences  for  the  amelioration  of  war. 

Since  a  conference  of  nations  can  meet  and  decide  on 
the  mitigation  of  the  horrors  of  war,  it  is  certainly  con- 
ceivable that  a  tribunal  of  nations  can  prevent  war. 
Such  a  tribunal  would  in  no  respect  differ  from  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  its  fundamental 
foundations.  As  our  Supreme  Court  is  final  in  settling 
all  disputes  in  this  country,  so  the  international  court 
would  be  final  in  adjusting  all  controversies  between  the 
nations.  And  such  a  court  is  clearly  the  next  decisive 
step  in  the  promotion  of  this  great  task  of  securing 
world-peace. 

If  nations  can  agree  to  establish  war  as  their  arbiter 
of  peace,  why  can  they  not  establish  a  more  peaceful 
substitute  ?  It  is  possible,  for  there  is  nothing  in  the 
nature  of  strife  that  cannot  be  settled,  no  quarrel  that 
cannot  be  judged,  no  difficulty  that  cannot  be  satis- 
factorily adjusted. 

With  the  establishment  of  a  true  world-court,  there 
would  rise  on  the  vision  of  the  nations  for  the  first  time 
the  prospect  of  justice  for  the  united  whole  of  mankind. 


164  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

Justice  to  the  smaller  countries  would  be  secured ;  en- 
croachments by  the  strong  upon  the  weak  would  be  pre- 
vented ;  the  moral  standard  of  politics  would  be  uplifted ; 
and  though  every  step  would  be  exposed  to  the  selfish- 
ness, corruption,  and  love  of  despotism  that  are  preva- 
lent in  all  men,  yet  is  it  not  reasonable  to  suppose  that, 
as  progress  is  now  being  made  in  the  various  nations 
for  overcoming  these  evils,  so  it  would  be  made  in  this 
united  whole,  to  the  unspeakable  benefit  of  mankind  ? 

This  country  has  been  foremost  in  the  promotion  of 
this  great  movement  to  organize  the  world.  It  is  espe- 
cially fitting  that  the  United  States  should  take  the  lead. 
The  greatest  nation  having  a  government  of  the  people 
and  by  the  people,  with  the  longest  experience  and  the 
greatest  success,  is  best  fitted  to  lead  others.  We  have 
the  form  of  national  government  which  foreshadows  the 
form  of  world-government.  Theoretically,  our  states  are 
sovereign  ;  all  rights  which  are  not  formally  surrendered 
by  accepting  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  are 
reserved  to  them.  In  a  like  manner,  referring  to  the 
establishment  of  a  world-court,  the  nations  individually 
will  be  expected  to  surrender  to  the  nations  collectively 
only  such  jurisdiction  as  pertains  to  the  settling  of 
their  controversies. 

A  world-court  would  appeal  to  the  strongest,  the  pur- 
est, and  the  deepest  thinkers  of  every  race.  It  would 
cover  a  new  field,  appealing  to  reason  and  altruism  and 
justice.  It  would  by  its  very  effect  upon  individuals 
tend  to  develop  the  qualities  it  demands,  and  would 
prove  a  mighty  influence  for  uplifting  the  intellectual 
and  moral  standards  not  only  of  men  but  nations.  It 
would  by  its  very  international  nature  annihilate  all 


THE  TASK  OF  THE  TWENTIETH  CENTURY       165 

national  antipathies   and  promote   an  era  of  universal 
good  will  and  genuine  understanding. 

To  send  a  husband  or  father,  glorious  in  the  perfection 
of  physical  manhood,  out  on  the  field  of  carnage  to  be 
slain  in  an  effort  to  settle  international  difficulty  or  to 
uphold  fancied  national  honor,  is  unquestionable  bar- 
barism. It  is  far  more  humane  to  terminate  disputed 
questions  by  arbitration  than  by  the  keen-edged  sword. 
International  peace  compacts  can  hold  mankind  together 
by  unbreakable  yet  unburdensome  bonds  and  greatly 
promote  prosperity  and  social  progress.  The  wanton  woe 
and  waste  that  inevitably  follow  in  the  train  of  war  will 
soon  be  things  of  the  past.  The  twentieth  century,  al- 
ready so  full  of  radiant  promise,  so  enlivened  by  a  new 
social  conscience,  will  devote  its  collective  energies  to 
the  abolition  of  war  and  the  substitution  of  its  successor 
—  a  world-court,  based  on  the  facts  of  humane  solidarity 
and  the  principles  of  international  peace. 


THE  PRESENT  STATUS  OF  INTERNATIONAL 
ARBITRATION 

By  BRYANT  SMITH,  Guilford  College,  North  Carolina,  a 
Senior  in  Guilford  College 

Prize-Winning  Essay  in  the  Pugsley  Contest,  1912-1913 


THE  PUGSLEY  PRIZE-ESSAY  CONTESTS 

In  1908  Mr.  Chester  DeWitt  Pugsley,  then  an  undergraduate 
student  in  Harvard  University,  gave  $50  as  a  prize  to  be  offered 
by  the  Lake  Mohonk  Conference  for  the  best  essay  on  "Inter- 
national Arbitration  "  by  an  undergraduate  student  of  an  Ameri- 
can college.  The  prize  was  won  by  L.  13.  Bobbitt  of  Baltimore, 
a  sophomore  in  Johns  Hopkins  University.  The  following  year 
(1909-1910)  a  similar  prize,  of  $100,  was  won  by  George  Knowles 
Gardner  of  Worcester,  Massachusetts,  a  Harvard  sophomore. 
A  like  prize  of  $100  in  1910-1911  was  won  by  Harry  Posner  of 
West  Point,  Mississippi,  a  senior  in  the  Mississippi  Agricultural 
and  Mechanical  College. 

The  prize  of  1911-1912,  of  which  John  K.  Starkweather  of  Den- 
ver, Colorado,  a  junior  in  Brown  University,  was  the  winner,  was 
the  first  offered  to  men  students  only  (other  similar  prizes  having 
been  offered  to  women  students)  in  the  United  States  and  Canada. 

In  the  fifth  Pugsley  contest  (1912-1913)  the  prize  was  awarded 
to  Bryant  Smith  of  Guilford  College,  North  Carolina,  a  senior  in 
Guilford  College  at  the  same  place,  whose  essay  follows.  The 
judges  were  Chancellor  Elmer  Ellsworth  Brown  of  New  York 
University,  Rollo  Ogden,  editor  of  the  New  York  Evening  Post, 
and  Lieutenant  General  Nelson  A.  Miles,  U.  S.  A.,  retired. 

Each  winner  is  invited  to  the  Lake  Mohonk  Conference  next 
following,  where  he  publicly  receives  the  prize  from  its  donor, 
Mr.  Pugsley. 


168 


THE  PRESENT  STATUS  OF  INTERNATIONAL 
ARBITRATION 

The  first  concerted  effort  looking  toward  an  eventual 
world-wide  peace  was  the  Hague  Conference  of  1899, 
where  representatives  of  twenty-six  nations  assembled  in 
response  to  a  rescript  from  the  Czar  of  Russia,  whose 
avowed  purpose,  as  set  forth  in  the  rescript,  was  to  dis- 
cuss ways  and,  if  possible,  devise  means,  to  arrest  the 
alarming  increase  in  expenditures  for  armaments  which 
threatened  to  bankrupt  the  national  governments. 

Unable  to  accomplish  anything  definite  in  this  respect 
because  of  the  vigorous  opposition  headed  by  Germany, 
the  delegates  turned  their  attention  toward  giving  official 
recognition  and  concrete  form  to  ideas  which  had  already 
obtained  in  the  settlement  of  international  disputes,  and 
toward  the  formation  of  a  court  before  which  the  nations 
might  have  their  differences  adjudicated.  The  principles 
embodied  in  good  offices  and  mediation  and  commis- 
sions of  inquiry  have  given  gratifying  evidence  of  their 
efficiency,  each  in  its  respective  capacity.  The  original 
achievement  of  the  conference,  however,  was  the  Per- 
manent Court  of  Arbitration.  The  composition  of  this 
court  was  to  include  not  more  than  four  persons  from 
each  of  the  signatory  powers ;  from  which  panel,  in  case 
of  an  appeal  to  arbitration,  each  party  was  to  select  two 
judges,  who,  in  turn,  should  elect  their  own  umpire  un- 
less otherwise  provided  by  the  disputants.  That  it  would 

169 


170  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

be  subject  to  criticism  might  have  been  expected.  That 
twenty-six  nations  could  unanimously  agree  upon  any 
court  whatever  was  the  real  occasion  for  surprise.  The 
four  cases  arbitrated  during  the  eight  years  intervening 
between  this  and  the  Second  Hague  Conference  served 
to  bring  out  its  defects,  chief  of  which  were  its  decen- 
tralized and  intangible  nature.  Nominally  a  court,  in 
reality  it  was  but  a  panel  scattered  all  over  the  world 
from  which  a  court  could,  with  great  difficulty  and  ex- 
pense, be  selected.  Nominally  permanent,  in  reality  it 
had  to  be  re-created  for  each  case  to  be  judged. 

The  Second  Hague  Conference,  working  on  a  basis  of 
this  short  experience,  undertook  to  remedy  these  inherent 
defects  in  the  arbitral  machinery  by  leaving  the  Perma- 
nent Court  just  as  it  was,  and  by  creating  besides  an 
International  Court  of  Prize  to  serve  a  special  function 
indicated  by  its  name,  and  a  court  of  Judicial  Arbitra- 
tion to  supplement  the  work  of,  if  not  eventually  to 
supplant,  the  former  court.  To  insure  greater  impar- 
tiality and  also  to  encourage  the  weaker  powers  the  ex- 
penses of  the  new  court,  instead  of  falling  upon  the 
litigants  in  each  case,  were  to  be  prorated  among  the 
ratifying  powers.  To  insure  greater  tangibility  and  per- 
manency the  new  court  was  to  be  composed  of  only 
seventeen  members,  each  to  serve  a  term  of  twelve  years 
at  a  salary  of  $2400  per  annum,  with  an  additional 
$40  for  each  day  of  actual  service.  Furthermore,  the 
court  was  to  meet  once  a  year  and  to  elect  each  year  a 
delegation  of  three  of  its  members  to  sit  at  The  Hague 
for  settling  minor  cases  arising  in  the  interval  between 
regular  sessions,  having  the  power  also  to  call  extra 
sessions  of  the  entire  court  whenever  occasion  should 


STATUS  OF  INTERNATIONAL  ARBITRATION     171 

demand.  To  insure  a  more  judicial  personnel  the  con- 
vention specifies  that  members  shall  be  qualified  to  hold 
high  legal  posts  in  their  respective  countries.  The 
method  by  which  members  of  the  court  were  to  be  ap- 
pointed —  the  one  point  upon  which  the  delegates  were 
unable  to  agree  —  was  deferred  for  subsequent  deter- 
mination. 

This,  in  addition  to  the  one  hundred  and  fifty-odd 
treaties  privately  entered  into  by  two  or  more  nations, 
many  of  which  contain  pledges  to  submit  certain  classes 
of  disputes  to  the  Permanent  Court,  is,  in  brief,  what 
has  been  accomplished  by  way  of  constructive  political 
organization  by  the  modern  peace  movement. 

How  much  does  this  signify  ?  In  view  of  the  present 
attitude  of  the  social  mind,  what  are  we  to  infer  from 
this  as  bearing  upon  the  ultimate  outcome  of  interna- 
tional arbitration  ?  It  shall  be  the  purpose  of  this  paper 
to  answer  that  question. 

In  an  address  before  the  Mohonk  Conference  of  1911 
Dr.  Cyrus  Northrup,  ex-president  of  the  University  of 
Minnesota,  said :  "  What  is  really  wanted  is  not  con- 
tinued talking  in  favor  of  peace  with  the  idea  of  con- 
verting the  people  ;  for  the  people  are  already  converted ! 
They  are  ready  for  peace  and  arbitration ! "  In  the 
October  number  of  the  Revieiv  of  Reviews  for  1909, 
Privy  Councillor  Karl  von  Stengel,  one  of  the  German 
delegation  to  the  First  Hague  Conference,  is  quoted  as 
follows :  "  It  must  be  stated  emphatically  that  in  its 
ultimate  aims  the  peace  movement  is  not  only  .  .  .  Uto- 
pian, but . . .  dangerous "  These  quotations  are  given 

as  typical  of  the  attitude  manifested  by  the  two  extremes, 
the  injudiciously  optimistic  and  the  ultraconservative, 


172  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

toward  every  social  reform.  All  true  progress  pursues 
a  course  intermediate  to  these  two. 

The  idea  entertained  by  so  many  enthusiastic  peace 
advocates,  that  the  world  is  ready  for  peace  if  we  but 
had  institutional  facilities  adequate  to  carry  out  the  will 
of  the  people,  is  erroneous.  In  all  democratic  states 
political  institutions  are  but  a  concrete  expression  of 
the  social  mind,  the  media  created  by  the  people,  through 
which  society  executes  its  will.  "  With  a  given  phase 
of  human  character  .  .  .  there  must  go  an  adapted  class 
of  institutions."  1  Therefore,  I  submit  that  if  the  people 
were  ready  for  peace  they  could  easily  provide  the 
means  necessary  for  its  accomplishment. 

The  first  gentleman  quoted  above  drew  his  conclusion 
from  the  indications  that  of  the  two  million  inhabitants 
of  his  state,  one  million  nine  hundred  thousand  would 
favor  arbitration  as  shown  by  the  enthusiasm  manifested 
at  a  meeting  of  the  state  peace  society  a  few  weeks  be- 
fore. Similar  conditions  in  other  parts  of  the  country, 
he  thought,  would  corroborate  the  application  of  his 
assertion  to  the  entire  country.  Such  a  conclusion  is 
fallacious  in  that  it  fails  to  consider  three  essential  facts 
about  the  people  of  the  United  States  which  largely  de- 
termine the  attitude  of  any  people  toward  war.  First, 
they  have  no  grievance.  Second,  no  appeal  is  being 
made  to  their  patriotic  bias.  Third,  their  emotions  and 
passions  are  quiescent. 

The  first  of  these  needs  only  brief  mention.  No  people 
in  this  enlightened  age  wishes  to  fight  as  a  matter  of 
course,  regardless  of  any  reasonable  pretext.  If  nations 
never  had  any  personal  interests  involved,  there  would, 

1  Herbert  Spencer,  "The  Study  of  Sociology." 


STATUS  OF  INTERNATIONAL  ARBITRATION    173 

of  course,  be  no  more  war.  In  this  respect  the  people  of 
the  United  States  are  not  ahead  of  the  other  parts  of 
the  civilized  world.  Disinterested  parties  have  been  in 
favor  of  peace  for  two  thousand  years. 

The  other  two  facts  deserve  more  extended  consid- 
eration. 

The  disposition  in  individuals  to  pluck  motes  out  of 
their  neighbors'  eyes  and  leave  beams  in  their  own,  in 
the  nation  becomes  what  Herbert  Spencer  calls  the  bias 
of  patriotism.  According  to  him  patriotism  is  but  an 
extended  self-interest.  We  love  our  country  because  our 
own  interests  and  our  country's  interests  are  one.  Un- 
able to  view  international  affairs  apart  from  national 
interests,  we  are  handicapped  in  making  those  balanced 
judgments  necessary  to  judicial  arbitration.  An  act  rep- 
rehensible under  the  Union  Jack  becomes  patriotic  under 
the  Stars  and  Stripes.  At  both  Hague  Conferences  all 
the  powers  were  seemingly  in  favor  of  curtailing  expen- 
ditures for  armaments.  The  unprecedented  increase  in 
expenditures  which  followed  bespeaks  their  sincerity,  or, 
rather,  bespeaks  each  nation's  mistrust  of  the  sincerity 
of  others.  A  number  of  years  ago  the  Farmers'  Alliance, 
organized  in  some  of  the  Southern  tobacco  states,  voted 
to  reduce  the  acreage  of  tobacco  for  a  given  year  in 
order  to  raise  the  price.  So  many  members  tried  to  profit 
by  this  opportunity  to  realize  a  high  price  for  a  big  crop 
that  there  was  a  greater  acreage  planted  that  year  than 
ever  before.  Can  we  expect  better  of  groups  than  of  the 
individuals  of  which  the  groups  are  composed  ?  Most 
nations  question  the  justice  of  Russia's  policy  leading  up 
to  the  war  with  Japan,  England's  course  in  South  Africa, 
and  America's  attitude  toward  the  Philippines ;  yet  the 


174  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

body  of  citizens  of  each  of  these  three  countries,  while  con- 
curring in  the  general  opinion  concerning  the  other  two, 
justifies  its  own  government's  actions  with  patriotic  pride. 
The  chief  respect  in  which  this  bias  interferes  with  the 
progress  of  international  arbitration  is  in  restricting  the 
scope  of  general  arbitration  treaties,  the  average  formula 
of  such  treaties  excluding  all  questions  which  involve 
"  national  honor  and  vital  interests."  A  greatly  modified 
survival  of  the  spirit  which  in  primitive  peoples  regarded 
the  tribe  over  the  mountain  or  across  the  stream  as  a 
fit  object  of  hatred  and  fear,  the  objection  to  a  judicial 
settlement  of  such  questions  assumes  that  a  nation's 
honor  and  vital  interests  are  goods  peculiar  in  that  they 
may  be  inconsistent  with  justice.  The  attitude  of  the 
United  States  toward  the  recently  proposed  treaty  be- 
tween England  and  America  may  be  taken  as  typical 
of  the  attitude  which  prevails  on  this  subject  generally. 
The  formulators  of  the  treaty  took  an  advanced  step  in 
that,  instead  of  reserving  questions  of  national  honor 
and  vital  interests,  they  provided  for  the  arbitration  of 
all  differences  which  are  "  justiciable  in  their  nature  by 
reason  of  being  susceptible  of  decision  by  the  application 
of  principles  of  law  or  equity,"  thereby  recognizing  the 
judicial  nature  of  arbitration.  The  action  of  the  Senate, 
however,  which  sustained  the  opinion  of  the  majority 
report  of  the  Senate  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations, 
objecting  to  the  last  clause  of  Article  III  of  the  treaty,1 

1  The  clause,  referring  to  the  commission  of  inquiry,  reads : 

"  It  is  further  agreed,  however,  that  in  cases  in  which  the  Parties  disagree  as 
to  whether  or  not  a  difference  is  subject  to  arbitration  under  Article  I  of  this 
Treaty,  that  question  shall  be  submitted  to  the  Joint  High  Commission  of  In- 
quiry ;  and  if  all  or  all  but  one  of  the  members  of  the  Commission  agree  and  report 
that  such  difference  is  within  the  scope  of  Article  I,  it  shall  be  referred  to  arbitra- 
tion in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  treaty."  — Editor 


STATUS  OF  INTERNATIONAL  ARBITRATION    175 

would  indicate  that  the  significance  of  a  general  arbitra- 
tion treaty  attaches  not  so  much  to  the  definition  of  its 
scope  as  to  who  shall  determine  what  cases  conform  to 
the  definition.  It  would  seem  that  the  nature  of  the 
reservation  is  relatively  unimportant  so  long  as  its  in- 
terpretation devolves  upon  the  parties  at  variance.  The 
majority  report,  objecting  to  the  delegation  to  the  joint 
high  commission  of  the  power  to  determine  the  arbitra- 
bility  of  cases  in  terms  of  the  treaty,  contains  this  state- 
ment1 in  which  the  minority  report  likewise  concurs : 
"  Every  one  agrees  that  there  are  certain  questions  which 
no  nation  .  .  .  will  ever  submit  to  the  decision  of  any 
one  else."  As  cases  of  this  nature  it  enumerates  terri- 
torial integrity,  admission  of  immigrants,  and  our  Monroe 
Doctrine.  The  significance  of  this  insistence  upon  a  means 
of  evasion  is  evident.  There  is  not  yet  enough  inter- 
national confidence.  The  powers  are  not  yet  ready  to 
submit  to  unlimited  arbitration. 

The  other  enemy  to  rational  judgment  —  and  rational 
judgment  must  be  the  only  basis  of  arbitration  —  is  the 
danger  of  emotionalism.  The  average  man  is  yet  largely 
irrational.  When  cool  and  self-possessed,  and  when  his 
prejudices  and  traditions  do  not  interfere,  he  can  pass 
rational  judgment  upon  questions  in  which  his  own  in- 
terests are  not  concerned;  but  when  his  passions  are 
aroused  he  dispenses  with  any  effort  to  reason  and  acts 
in  obedience  to  blind  impulse.  He  knows  that  it  is  ex- 
pensive to  fight,  that  it  is  dangerous,  and  that  it  is  wrong ; 
but  when  he  is  provoked,  he  fights.  The  characteristics 
of  the  average  man  are  the  characteristics  of  society. 
We  have  not  yet  outgrown  the  mob. 

1  See  Senate  Document  98,  62d  Cong.,  1st  Sess.,  9-10.—  Editor 


176  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

Interwoven  with  tins  impulsive  temperament  and  asso- 
ciated with  some  of  the  most  cherished  affections  of  the 
human  heart  is  the  spirit  of  war,  developed  by  thousands 
of  generations  of  ancestral  conflict  and  passed  011  to  us 
as  a  heritage  to  be  rooted  out  of  our  nature  before  we 
shall  realize  in  its  fullness  the  ideal  for  which  we  strive. 
Mortal  conflict  sanctified  by  religion,  devastation  ideal- 
ized by  literature,  pillage  justified  by  patriotism,  fellow- 
destruction  ennobled  by  self-sacrifice  —  these  form  a 
complex  of  contradictory  emotions  from  which  men  are 
as  yet  unable  to  unravel  the  one  essential  characteristic 
of  war ;  namely,  the  attempt  to  dispense  justice  in  a 
trial  by  battle,  and  make  it  stand  out  in  its  revealed 
inconsistency,  dissociated  from  its  traditional  concomi- 
tants of  which  it  is  neither  part  nor  parcel.  The  romance 
of  knighthood  and  chivalry  still  appeals  to  the  human 
heart,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  war,  love,  and  re- 
ligion, the  knight's  creed,  are  an  inconsistent  combination. 
Most  men  can  be  made  to  see  this  in  their  minds,  but 
cannot  be  made  to  feel  it  in  their  souls.  Many  old  Civil 
War  veterans,  who  would  not  consent  for  their  sons  to 
volunteer  in  the  Spanish-American  War,  would  have 
gone  themselves  had  they  been  able.  Some  did  go.  To 
men  so  disposed  it  is  useless  to  talk  of  the  horrors  of 
war.  Give  us  a  just  grievance ;  let  some  competent 
enthusiast  inflame  this  passion  with  a  war  cry  like 
"  Remember  the  Maine,"  "  Fifty-four  forty  or  fight," 
"  Liberty  or  death,"  and,  reenf  orced  by  the  animal  inherent 
in  man,  it  will  arouse  popular  demonstrations  devoid  of  all 
reason,  creating  a  force  that  cannot  be  controlled  by  a 
cold,  calculating  intellect.  Can  you  listen  to  a  bugle  call 
on  a  clear,  still  night  without  a  quickening  of  the  pulse 


STATUS  OF  INTERNATIONAL  ARBITRATION    177 

as  there  flashes  through  your  soul  a  suggestion  of  all  past 
history  with  its  marshaling  hosts  and  heroic  deeds  ?  Can 
you  see  a  military  parade  without  a  suggestion  of  "  Dixie" 
and  the  Star  Spangled  Banner,  or  feeling  your  bosom  swell 
with  patriotic  pride  ?  This  association  may  be,  and  doubt- 
less is,  a  delusion,  but  it  is  a  delusion  developed  and 
fortified  by  thousands  of  years  of  custom  and  precedent 
and  it  would  be  contrary  to  the  history  of  human  prog- 
ress if  man  should  become  disillusionized  in  one  gen- 
eration. It  may  take  centuries.  If  we  are  to  have 
international  arbitration  in  the  near  future,  we  must 
have  it  in  spite  of  this  spirit  of  war  rather  than  by  de- 
stroying the  spirit.  In  fact,  the  only  practical  way  to 
destroy  it  is  to  let  it,  like  vestigial  organs  of  which  biol- 
ogists tell  us,  degenerate  from  disuse.  This  inherited 
emotional  tendency  remains  as  a  threat  with  which  we, 
as  exponents  of  arbitration,  must  reckon  before  we  are 
justified  in  saying  that  the  world  is  ready  for  peace. 

Because  of  these  two  social  characteristics  —  the  patri- 
otic bias  which  perverts  judgment,  and  uncontrolled 
passions  which  submerge  reason — the  educational  propa- 
gandists still  have  a  task  to  perform. 

Let  us  now  examine  the  stand-pat  idea  that  unlimited 
arbitration  is  but  a  dream  as  expressed  in  the  quotation 
from  Privy  Councillor  Stengel.  This  is  farther  from  the 
truth  than  the  other  extreme  just  discussed.  Pie  who 
will,  with  an  unprejudiced  mind,  examine  cross  sections 
of  history  at  widely  separated  stages,  cannot  fail  to  see 
that  along  with  the  growing  tendency  of  reason  to  pre- 
dominate over  passion,  superstition,  and  custom  there 
has  been  a  parallel  tendency  to  restrict  militarism  as  a 
social  activity.  From  a  war  conceived  as  religion  to  war 


178  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

as  patriotism,  then  war  as  commercialism  and  the  tool 
of  ambition,  man  is  now  coming  to  the  more  rational 
conception  of  war  as  the  despoiler  of  nations.  David 
speaks  of  the  "  season  of  the  year  "  when  nations  went 
forth  to  battle.  Fifteen  hundred  years  later  governments 
pretended  at  least  to  justify  their  military  operations  on 
rational  grounds.  To-day  war  is  the  last  resort,  and  even 
its  most  ardent  defenders  do  not  attempt  to  justify  it 
except  in  disputes  which  involve  national  honor  and 
vital  interests. 

In  view  of  the  foregoing  facts  it  is  evident  that  the 
modern  peace  movement  has  by  no  means  the  whole  of 
the  task  to  perform.  Rather,  we  can  almost  justify  our- 
selves in  the  assumption  that  war  is  not  long  to  remain 
one  of  our  social  inconsistencies  and  that  it  is  now  mak- 
ing its  last,  and,  therefore,  most  determined,  stand  on 
questions  of  national  honor  and  vital  interests. 

Among  the  numerous  forces  contributing  to  this  evo- 
lution of  international  peace,  the  chief  agencies  have 
been,  and  still  are,  moral  and  industrial.  These  same 
forces  are  working  to-day  with  cumulative  effect. 

Warfare  is  becoming  more  and  more  inconsistent  with 
the  ethical  spirit  of  the  times.  Men  may  talk  of  the 
expenses,  horrors,  and  devastations  of  war  as  paramount 
causes  for  the  tendency  to  substitute  arbitration ;  but 
antedating  all  other  causes,  underlying  and  strengthen- 
ing all  others,  is  the  slowly  changing  social  conscience 
which,  as  each  generation  passes,  appreciates  more  fully 
warfare's  inconsistency  with  justice  and  antagonism  to 
right.  This  same  cause  found  civilized  society  taking 
keen  delight  in  the  heathen  barbarity  of  a  gladiatorial 
combat,  and  has  transformed  and  lifted  it  up  to  where 


STATUS  OF  INTERNATIONAL  ARBITRATION     179 

it  is  horrified  at  a  bull-baiting  or  a  prize  fight.  It  found 
human  beings  with  absolute  power  of  life  and  death  over 
other  human  beings  and  has  evolved  the  view  that  all 
men  are  created  free  and  equal.  It  found  individuals 
settling  questions  of  honor  by  a  resort  to  arms,  and  has 
substituted  therefor  a  judge,  counsel,  and  a  jury.  These 
three  institutions  —  gladiatorial  combats,  slavery,  and 
dueling  —  were  no  more  regarded  in  their  day  as  only 
temporary  phenomena  of  social  evolution  than  is  war  so 
regarded  by  military  sympathizers  of  to-day ;  yet  these 
have  one  by  one  been  eliminated,  and  war  is  fast  becom- 
ing as  much  out  of  harmony  with  the  ethical  spirit  of 
this  age  as  was  each  of  the  above  out  of  harmony  with 
the  spirit  of  the  age  which  dispensed  with  it,  and  the 
effort  to  demonstrate  that  war  is  just  as  dispensable  is 
meeting  with  success.  The  teachings  of  Christ,  who  two 
thousand  years  ago  announced  the  doctrine  of  human 
brotherhood  and  surrendered  his  life  to  make  this  doc- 
trine effective,  have  slowly  but  surely  wrought  their 
leavening  influence  upon  the  source  of  all  war ;  namely, 
the  hearts  of  men.  Warfare  has  for  centuries  been  grad- 
ually yielding  to  this  deepening  consciousness  and  that 
it  must  eventually,  if  not  soon,  take  its  place  beside  the 
long-discarded  gladiatorial  profession,  the  outlawed  slave 
trade,  and  the  discountenanced  custom  of  the  duelist 
must  be  evident  to  any  one  who  takes  more  than  a  super- 
ficial view  of  the  great  determining  forces  which  shape 
human  progress. 

Besides  moral  forces,  industrial  forces  were  mentioned 
as  a  factor  tending  to  the  adoption  of  arbitration.  Dur- 
ing recent  times,  under  the  impetus  caused  by  the  rela- 
tively modern  innovations  of  steam,  electricity,  and  the 


180  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

press,  this  class  of  causes  has  been  unusually  effective. 
Industry  has  overstepped  international  boundary  lines. 
Through  the  division  of  labor  we  are  passing  from  the 
independence  of  nations  to  the  interdependence  of  na- 
tions. International  banking,  transportation,  and  com- 
merce, by  establishing  communities  of  interest  in  all 
parts  of  the  world,  are  binding  the  peoples  of  the  earth 
into  one  great  industrial  organization.  As  striking  evi- 
dence of  this  development,  more  than  one  hundred  and 
fifty  international  associations1  and  more  than  thirty-five 
international  unions  of  states  have  been  formed.  The 
modern  intricate  system  of  communication  is  a  veritable 
nervous  system  which,  in  the  event  of  any  local  paralysis 
or  upheaval,  informs  the  entire  industrial  organism.  The 
figure  is  no  longer  "  the  shot  heard,  round  the  world," 
but  becomes  "  the  pulse-beat  felt,  round  the  world."  If 
Spencer's  definition  of  patriotism  —  that  is,  coextensive 
with  personal  interests  —  is  correct,  the  bias  of  patriotism 
cannot  retard  the  progress  of  arbitration  much  longer, 
for  patriotism  will  be  a  world-wide  feeling,  since  personal 
interests  are  no  longer  restricted  to  nationality. 

No,  Herr  Stengel,  each  passing  year  finds  the  causes 
which  make  for  war  weakened  and  the  causes  which 
make  for  arbitration  proportionately  reenforced.  The 
skeptics  are  the  dreamers  and  the  peace  workers  are  the 
practical  men  of  affairs. 

From  the  foregoing  synopsis  of  the  technical  accom- 
plishments of  the  modern  peace  movement  to  date,  and 
from  the  effort  to  interpret  their  significance  in  the  light 
of  fundamental  social  characteristics  and  the  present 
social  attitude,  I  trust  three  things  have  become  evident  : 

1  "  Annuaire  de  la  Vie  Internationale,"  1910-1911,  reports  on  510.—  Editor 


STATUS  OF  INTERNATIONAL  ARBITRATION     181 

First.  The  movement  for  international  peace  through 
arbitration,  far  from  being  a  mere  bubble  on  the  surface 
of  society  to  be  burst  by  the  first  war  cloud  which  ap- 
pears on  the  horizon,  is  a  movement,  centuries  old,  coin- 
cident with  social  evolution,  deep-rooted  in  the  very 
nature  of  a  developing  world-wide  civilization. 

Second.  International  peace  through  arbitration  is  not 
to  be  a  ready-made  affair,  coming  in  on  the  crest  of  some 
wave  of  popular  enthusiasm  as  was  expected  by  many 
in  1899. 

Third.  Being  an  outgrowth  of  the  natural  laws  of 
human  development,  a  result  so  much  deeper  and  more 
fundamental  than  political  laws  can  produce,  interna- 
tional peace  through  arbitration  may  be  furthered,  but 
cannot  be  accomplished,  by  legislation ;  may  be  delayed, 
but  cannot  be  prevented,  by  the  neglect  to  legislate.  To 
undertake  to  hasten  arbitration  by  forcing  legislative 
proceedings  beyond  what  the  people  will  indorse,  would 
be  as  futile  as  to  turn  up  the  hands  of  the  clock  to 
hasten  the  passage  of  time. 

To  those  who  can  appreciate  these  facts  there  is  no 
occasion  for  discouragement  in  the  suspicious  attitude 
manifested  by  the  powers  toward  any  definite  step  in 
the  direction  of  unrestricted  arbitration,  apparently  so  in- 
consistent with  their  general  pacific  professions.  "  Rapid 
growth  and  quickly  accomplished  reforms  are  necessarily 
unsound,  incomplete,  and  disappointing."  l 

With  the  truth  of  these  deductions  granted,  it  would 
seem  safe  to  assume  that  the  institutions  for  the  settle- 
ment of  international  difficulties  will  develop  in  much 
the  same  way  as  have  the  institutions  for  the  settlement 

1  F.  H.  Giddings,  "The  Elements  of  Sociology." 


182  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

of  difficulties  between  individuals.  It  should  be  profit- 
able, therefore,  to  compare  the  present  growth  of  arbitra- 
tion with  the  evolution  and  decay  of  the  various  modes 
of  trial  as  the  idea  of  judicial  settlement  diffused  itself 
through  the  min,d  of  the  English  people  causing  estab- 
lished forms  to  give  way  to  something  better.  Dispens- 
ing with  the  blood  feud,  which  hardly  deserves  the  name 
of  trial,  the  oldest  form  of  such  institution  was  trial  by 
ordeal  which,  according  to  Thayer  in  his  "  Evidence  at 
the  Common  Law,"  seems  to  have  been  "  indigenous 
with  the  human  creature  in  the  earliest  stages  of  his 
development."  This  form  gradually  fell  into  disuse  be- 
fore the  more  rational  form  of  compurgation  introduced 
into  Teutonic  courts  in  the  fifth  century.  In  1215  it 
was  formally  abolished.  Compurgation  was  abolished  in 
1440  as  its  inferiority  to  trial  by  witnesses  became  fully 
recognized.  In  the  latter  form,  instituted  early  in  the 
ninth  century,  when  the  witnesses  disagreed  the  judicial 
talent  of  the  day  conceived  of  no  other  method  of  de- 
cision than  to  fight  it  out.  Thus  we  have  trial  by 
witnesses  and  trial  by  battle  developing  concurrently, 
although  they  were  recognized  as  distinct  forms.  After 
two  centuries  of  effort  to  abolish  it,  trial  by  battle  was 
made  illegal  in  1833,  the  last  case  recorded  as  being  so 
decided  occurring  in  1835.  Out  of  the  trial  by  witnesses 
has  evolved  our  modern  trial  by  jury,  at  first  limited 
to  certain  unimportant  cases,  then  having  its  sphere 
extended  as  its  superiority  became  more  evident,  until 
filially  it  superseded  all  other  forms  and  to-day  is  the 
accepted  mode  of  settling  even  questions  of  honor. 

The  growth  and  extension  of  international  arbitration 
has  not  been  dissimilar  to  this.   Six  cases  were  arbitrated 


STATUS  OF  INTERNATIONAL  ARBITRATION    183 

in  the  eighteenth  century,  four  hundred  and  seventy-one 
in  the  nineteenth,  while  more  than  one  hundred  and  fifty 
cases  have  been  arbitrated  during  the  first  thirteen  years 
of  the  twentieth  century.  Between  the  First  and  Second 
Hague  Conferences  only  four  cases  were  submitted  to 
the  Permanent  Court  of  Arbitration.  Since  the  Second 
Conference,  notwithstanding  the  unsatisfactory  disposi- 
tion of  the  Venezuelan  affair,  eight  cases  have  been 
tried,  a  ninth  is  pending,  a  tenth  will  soon  be  docketed 
if  the  United  States  is  not  to  act  the  hypocrite  in  her 
international  relations  by  refusing  to  submit  to  England's 
request  to  arbitrate  the  question  as  to  whether  or  no  we 
exempt  our  coastwise  vessels  from  toll  duty  through  the 
Panama  Canal.  Defects  have  been  detected  in  the  Per- 
manent Court  of  Arbitration  and  we  are  well  on  the 
way  toward  a  better  court.  Representatives  of  only 
twenty-six  nations  took  part  in  the  deliberations  of  the 
First  Hague  Conference;  representatives  of  forty-four 
nations  took  part  in  the  deliberations  of  the  Second 
Hague  Conference.  Wars  of  aggression  and  conquest, 
though  not  formally  outlawed,  are  effectively  so,  and 
arbitration  for  the  recovery  of  contract  debts  is  now 
practically  obligatory.  As  time  passes  and  its  feasibility 
gains  credence,  arbitration,  like  the  jury  trial,  will  ex- 
tend its  sphere  of  usefulness  until  it  too  settles  questions 
of  honor.  Nor  need  we  imply  from  this  analogy  that  it 
will  take  such  an  age  to  accomplish  this  result.  Because 
of  the  increased  mobility  of  society,  resulting  from  the 
greater  like-mindedness  and  consciousness  of  kind  inci- 
dent to  our  modern  communities  of  interests  and  systems 
of  communication,  and  from  our  greater  susceptibility 
to  rational  rather  than  traditional  appeals,  a  reform 


184  PRIZE  ORATIONS 

can  be  wrought  more  easily  and  the  people  can  adjust 
themselves  to  the  change  far  more  readily  than  several 
centuries  ago. 

Bearing  in  mind,  then,  our  attempted  analysis  of 
counter  social  forces  at  work,  our  deductions  from  this 
analysis  and  the  foregoing  analogy  the  significance  of 
which  grows  out  of  the  truth  of  these  deductions,  let  us 
conclude  with  a  suggestion  as  to  what  the  next  Hague 
Conference  should  attempt.  It  should,  of  course,  like  the 
former  Conferences,  extract  as  many  teeth  as  possible 
from  war.  As  to  improving  our  arbitration  facilities,  its 
first  task  evidently  should  be  to  determine  some  method 
whereby  members  of  the  Judicial  Arbitration  Court  shall 
be  apportioned  and  selected.  If,  as  has  been  suggested, 
it  is  decided  to  use  the  same  scheme  of  apportionment 
as  that  for  the  International  Court  of  Prize,  the  pro- 
vision that  each  party  to  a  case  shall  have  a  representa- 
tive on  the  bench  should  be  changed  so  as  to  provide 
that  neither  party  shall  have  a  representative  on  the 
bench.  If  this  court  is  not  to  be  a  misnomer  like  the 
Permanent  Court  of  Arbitration,  its  rulings  must  be  in 
accord  with  the  principles  of  jurisprudence  rather  than 
with  the  spirit  of  compromise  such  a  provision  would 
tend  to  produce.  With  this  accomplished  and  the  Judi- 
cial Court  of  Arbitration  put  in  practical  working  order 
"  of  free  and  easy  access  "  to  the  powers,  it  may  be 
doubted  whether  anything  further  can  be  done.  If  the 
powers  can  be  made  to  agree  to  submit  to  the  court  all 
cases  growing  out  of  the  disputed  interpretation  of  trea- 
ties, a  great  advance  will  have  been  made,  but  it  is  doubt- 
ful whether  the  present  state  of  public  opinion  would 
indorse  such  a  progressive  step.  These  international 


STATUS  OF  INTERNATIONAL  ARBITRATION    185 

legislators  can  do  no  more  than  provide  channels  through 
which  the  spirit  of  international  peace  can  exercise 
itself  as  it  expands,  and  the  Judicial  Court  of  Arbi- 
tration, at  the  optional  use  of  the  nations,  conforms 
admirably  to  this  requirement.  The  delegates  should, 
therefore,  avoid  the  universal  tendency  of  such  bodies 
to  legislate  too  much.  None  of  these  Hague  Conferences 
can  alone  accomplish  the  ultimate  purpose  of  the  so- 
called  dreamers,  but  each  Conference  may  be  a  land- 
mark on  the  upward  journey  toward  that  consummation, 
anticipated  by  Utopians  from  the  earliest  times,  foretold 
by  prophets  from  Micah  and  Isaiah  to  Robert  Burns 
and  Tennyson,  labored  for  by  practical  statesmen  from 
Hugo  Grotius  to  William  H.  Taft,  when  each  man  shall 
be  a  native  of  his  state  and  a  citizen  of  the  world. 

AUTHORITIES 

For  acts  and  conventions  of  Hague  Conferences : 

"  Texts  of  the  Peace  Conferences  "  by  James  Brown  Scott. 

For  data  concerning  proposed  treaty  with  England : 

Text  of  treaty  and  majority  and  minority  reports  of  Senate 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations. 

For  statistics  of  arbitration  treaties : 

"  Revised  List  of  Arbitration  Treaties,"  compiled  by  Denys 
P.  Myers. 

For  development  of  trial  by  jury : 

"  Evidence  at  the  Common  Law  "  by  Thayer. 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.OO  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


OCT   2  1137 


*» 


2*66-^  M 


1966" 


MAY   7  1940, 


/Mp  •:•      >rr 

_ 


JUN  13  1948 


RECEIVED 


K 


1 7  '66  -4  PM 


NQVij1962/.> 


LOAN  DEFT. 


LD  21-95m-7,'37 


0632 / 


Wf 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


